i 


P. 


\k 


■  \ 


/  i    ■ 


^f.y 


V. 


-'.i 


■\h 


LIBRARY 

OF  THE 

University  of  California. 

Mrs.  SARAH  P.  WALSWORTH. 

Received  October,  1894, 
Accessions  No.^^i/^/S^.      Class  No. 


l^/KOm^^ 


/?V'^yrv^9...9Vu(i) 


A    SYNOPSIS 


OF  THE 


MORAL  THEOLOGY  OF  PETER  DENS, 


AS  PREPARED  FOR  THE  USE  OF 


ROMISH   SEMINARIES 


AND 

STUDENTS  OF   THEOLOGY. 


TRANSLATED 

BHOM  THE  LATIN  OF  THE  MECHLIN  EDITION  OF  1838. 

BY  JOSEPH  F.  BERG, 

FORMERLY  PROFESSOR  OF  LATIN  AND   GREEK  IN 
MARSHALL   COLLEGE. 

FOURTH  EDITION. 

PHILADELPHIA: 
LIPPINCOTT,   GRAMBO  &  CO. 

1855. 


iTjm^' 


Entered  according  to  the  act  of  congress,  in  the  year  1841,  by  Joseph 
F.  Berg,  in  the  office  of  the  clerk  of  the  district  court  of  the  United 
States  in  and  for  the  eastern  district  of  Pennsylvania. 


J.  FAGAN,  STEREOTYPER. 


ADVERTISEMENT. 

I  CERTIFY,  that  the  extracts  from  the  "  Moral  The- 
ology of  Peter  Dens,"  translated  by  the  Rev.  J.  F. 
Berg,  have  been  compared  by  me  with  the  original 
Latin,  and  that  I  have  been  unable  to  discover  any 
error.  They  are  faithfully  rendered  into  English; 
and  in  idiomatic  sentences  the  sense  is  strictly  pre- 
served. The  paragraphs  or  lines  under  quotation 
marks  are  literal  translations;  those  not  so  marked 
give  the  sense,  or  the  sense  abbreviated,  where  the 
detail  at  large  might  not  be  equally  interesting.  And 
thus  the  title  of  this  work  is  maintained  throughout, 
"  A  Synopsis  of  the  Moral  Theology  of  Peter  Dens.'* 
It  is  such  a  translation  or  Synopsis,  however,  as  fully 
warrants  our  congratulating  the  English  reader,  as  he 
may  now  thus  readily  possess  the  means  of  ascertain- 
ing what  are  the  doctrines  and  peculiar  tenets  of  the 
Roman  Church  ;  and  that  too  from  a  work  authorized 
and  sanctioned  as  orthodox  by  the  Hierarchy  itself. — 
Thus  "fas  est  doceri  ab  hoste;"  beyond  which,  in 
this  case,  there  is  no  appeal. 

S.  E.  PARKER. 


The  Author  is  the  more  fortunate  in  securing  this  en- 
dorsement of  the  correctness  of  his  translation,  as  Mr. 
Parker  is  the  person  whom  Mr.  Hughes  designated  as  an 
umpire  in  a  dispute  relative  to  the  translation  of  a  Latin 
quotation,  in  the  course  of  his  controversy  with  the  late 
Dr.  Breckenridge. 


J^3  7- 


PREFACE. 


It  has  long  been  the  desire  of  the  Protestant  public 
that  general  access  might  be  obtained  to  the  Moral 
Theology  of  Peter  Dens ;  and  ever  since  my  attention 
has  been  more  directly  called  to  the  Romish  contro- 
versy, my  mind  has  been  impressed  with  the  impor- 
tance of  the  v^ork,  which  I  have  at  length  undertaken. 
Owing  to  the  pressing  duties  incident  to  an  extensive 
pastoral  charge,  the  translation  has  hitherto  progressed 
but  slowly ;  and  I  have  frequently  been  constrained  to 
leave  it  untouched  for  weeks  at  a  time.  Years  would 
probably  have  elapsed  before  the  manuscript  could 
have  been  put  into  the  printer's  hands,  if  I  had  defer- 
red the  publication  until  the  completion  of  the  whole 
work,  as  it  will  require  no  small  amount  of  labour  to 
prepare  a  synopsis  from  seven  closely  printed  volumes 
of  from  500  to  600  pages  each,  with  annotations,  &c. 
Protestant  ministers  have  frequently  urged  me  to  the 
work  which  I  have  commenced,  by  reminding  me  of 
the  important  service  which  a  book  of  this  kind  would 
render  to  them,  when  attempting  to  expose  the  mon- 
strous errors  and  strong  delusions  of  the  Church  of 
Rome.  Dens'  Theology  has  long  been  a  text-book  in 
Popish  Seminaries  on  the  continent  of  Europe,  and  in 
Ireland  especially,  from  which  country  our  largest 
importations  of  priests  are  made ;  and  I  consider  my- 
self providentially  favoured  in  having  procured  from 
Germany,  through  the  intervention  of  a  friend,  the  late 

(3) 


ritv/^ 


IV  PREFACE. 

Mechlin  edition  of  1838.  The  copy  in  my  possession 
is  from  the  Archbishop's  own  press,  and  is  therefore 
stamped  with  all  the  authority  which  the  most  scru- 
pulous and  fastidious  Romanist  could  desire.  The 
work  in  question  is  necessarily  accessible  to  few,  both 
on  account  of  the  high  price,  and  the  extreme  diffi- 
culty of  procuring  a  copy;  and  even  were  these  impe-_ 
diments  to  an  extensive  circulation  removed,  it  would 
still  be  covered  with  a  Latin  veil,  which  must  screen 
it  effectually  from  the  eyes  of  all,  except  the  learned. 
If  I  had  been  writing  a  book  merely  for  Protestant 
ministers,  I  should  probably  have  contented  myself 
with  a  simple  translation ;  but  as  I  know  the  common 
people,  both  Protestant  and  Papist,  will  read  it,  I  have 
thought  it  best  to  furnish  the  antidote  with  the  poison. 
For  the  correctness  of  my  translation,  I  can  and 
shall,  at  the  proper  time  and  place,  present  the  most 
satisfactory  vouchers.  In  preparing  my  remarks,  I 
have  conscientiously  adhered  to  what  I  firmly  believe 
to  be  the  truth;  and  I  am  persuaded  that  no  one, 
whether  friend  or  foe,  can  prove  that  any  of  my  state- 
ments of  facts  or  doctrines  have  been  warped  by  pre- 
judice. When  1  can  approve  a  sentiment  of  Peter 
Dens,  I  will  do  it,  not  for  the  love  of  Popery  how- 
ever, but  for  the  love  of  God's  truth ;  but  when  I  find 
doctrines  that  are  an  abomination  before  God  and  man, 
no  consideration  shall  hinder  me  from  reprobating 
them  as  they  deserve. 

I  am  well  aware  that  it  is  a  common  thing  for 
Popish  priests  to  deny  the  authority  of  any  works,  even 
though  published  by  their  most  approved  authors,  when- 
ever citations  are  made  from  them  in  illustration  of 
the  peculiarities  of  their  system.    But  if  they  say  that 


PREFACE.  V 

the  Church  is  not  responsible  for  the  theological  opi- 
nions of  private  individuals  in  her  communion,  be  they 
Archbishops,  Bishops,  or  Priests,  how  can  they  pre- 
tend that  their  church  is  always  "  free  from  pernicious 
errors,"  and  how  will  they  dare  to  teach  again  the 
words  of  their  authorized  catechism,  in  which  they  at- 
tempt to  prove  their  infallibility  by  such  arguments  as 
the  following  1 

1.  "  Because  as  we  have  seen  above,  from  Matt.  xvi. 
18.  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  who  cannot  tell  us  a  lie, 
has  promised,  that  his  church  should  be  built  upon  a 
rock,  proof  against  all  floods  and  storms,  like  the 
house  of  the  wise  builder,  of  whom  he  speaks.  Matt, 
vii.  25,  and  that  the  gates  of  hell,  that  is,  the  powers 
of  darkness,  should  not  prevail  against  it.  Therefore, 
the  Church  of  Christ  could  never  cease  to  be  holy  in 
her  doctrines,  and  could  never  fall  into  idolatry,  super- 
stition, or  any  heretical  errors  whatsoever. 

2.  "  Because  Christ,  who  is  the  way,  the  truth,  and 
the  life,  John  xiv.  6,  has  promised.  Matt,  xxviii.  19,  20, 
to  the  pastors  and  teachers  of  his  church,  to  be  with 
them  always,  even  to  the  end  of  the  icorld.    Therefore 

THEY    COULD    NEVER    GO    ASTRAY    BY    PERNICIOUS    ERRORS. 

For  how  could  they  go  out  of  the  right  way  of  truth 
and  life,  who  are  assured  to  have  always  in  their  com- 
pany, for  their  guide.  Him,  who  is  the  way,  the  truth, 
and  the  life  1 

3.  "Because  our  Lord  has  promised  to  the  same 
teachers,  John  xiv.  16,  17,  *  I  will  pray  to  the  Father, 
and  he  will  give  you  another  comforter,  that  he  may 
abide  with  you  for  ever,  even  the  Spirit  of  Truth :' 
and,  V.  26,  he  assures  them  that  this  Spirit  of  Truth 
'will  teach  them  all  things:'  and  chap.  xvi.  13,  that 

1# 


VI  PREFACE. 

he  *  shall  guide  them  into  all  truth.'  How  then  could 
it  be  possible  that  the  whole  body  of  these  pastors 
AND  teachers  of  the  church,  who,  by  virtue  of  these 
pronnises,  were  to  be  for  ever  guided  into  all  truth,  by 
the  Spirit  of  truth,  should  at  any  time  fall  from  the 
truth  by  errors  in  faith  ?"  &c. 

How  then,  I  ask,  could  it  be  possible  that  Peter 
Dens,  who  had  received  the  Holy  Spirit  by  the  impo- 
sition of  the  Bishop's  hands  at  his  ordination,  "  should 
at  any  time  fall  from  the  truth  by  errors  in  faith  ?" 
And  how  is  it  possible  that  the  Archbishop,  who  has 
given  to  the  world  the  late  edition  of  Dens'  Moral 
Theology,  revised  and  corrected,  and  who  has  en- 
dorsed and  amended  it,  should  have  fallen  "  from  the 
truth  by  errors  in  faith,"  especially  when  it  is  remem- 
bered that  extraordinary  spiritual  gifts  and  illumina- 
tion must  have  been  conferred  upon  him  during  his 
passage  from  one  ecclesiastical  dignity  to  another? 

The  whole  body  of  pastors  and  teachers  who  have 
received  the  promise  of  the  infallible  guidance  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  can,  of  course,  not  be  preserved  from  er- 
ror, unless  this  promise  is  verified  in  each  individual 
member.  If  one  may  err  in  matters  of  faith,  two  may 
do  the  same,  and  if  two,  then  twenty,  and  so — a  hun- 
dred or  more,  until  the  whole  body  may  finally  aposta- 
tize from  the  faith.  Hence  we  see  the  firm  foundation 
upon  which  the  orthodoxy  of  the  Archbishop  and  his 
favourite  theologian  is  based. 

Surely,  we  shall  not  be  told  that  the  Spirit  of  Truth, 
(whose  infallible  direction  in  matters  of  faith  the 
priests  of  Rome  claim  for  themselves  as  accredited 
pastors  and  teachers,)  can  possibly  teach  one  doctrine 
in  Europe  and  its  opposite  in  America !    No !   no ! 


PREFACE.  vii 

The  ever-blessed  Spirit  will  never  accommodate  him- 
self to  the  variations  of  Popery,  for  he  is  what  the 
Church  of  Rome  falsely  claims  to  be,  "  always  and 
everywhere  the  same"  in  the  lessons  of  eternal  truth, 
which  he  inculcates.  The  claim  to  purity  of  doctrine, 
to  freedom  from  "  pernicious  errors,"  which  is  so 
strenuously  advocated  by  the  friends. of  Romanism, 
will,  therefore,  appear  to  be  what  it  really  is,  a  mon- 
strous, absurd,  arid  preposterous  delusion,  when  the 
morals  inculcated  in  some  parts  of  Dens'  System  of 
Theology  are  compared  with  the  pure  teachings  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  as  they  shine  upon  the  pages  of  God's 
blessed  word. 

I  have  marked  with  quotation  signs  every  passage 
which  purports  to  be  as  literal  a  translation  of  the  ori- 
ginal Latin,  as  idiom  will  allow.  Where  quotation 
signs  are  omitted,  I  have  merely  given  the  sense  of  the 
more  important  paragraphs,  and  have  endeavoured  to 
condense  as  much  as  possible.  I  have  been  careful  to 
avoid  making  garbled  extracts  ;  and  I  certainly  should 
deem  it  a  misfortune  if  I  had,  in  any  instance,  unwit- 
tingly perverted  a  sentiment  by  detaching  it  from  its 
connection.  If  any  such  error  should-  be  detected,  it 
will  give  me  pleasure  to  make  the  correction,  it  will 
be  observed  that  my  own  remarks  are  distinguished 
from  the  Synopsis  and  Translation  by  the  difference 
of  the  type. 

I  ask  a  candid  and  prayerful  perusal  of  the  follow- 
ing pages  from  those  individuals  in  the  communion  of 
the  Church  of  Rome,  who  are  not  to  be  deterred  by 
any  human  interdict  from  examining  for  themselves 
the  grounds  of  their  hope  of  everlasting  happiness. 
I  beseech  them  to  pause  before  they  condemn ;  I  pray 


Vill  PREFACE. 

them  to  turn  "  to  the  law  and  to  the  testimony."  "  If 
/  speak  not  according  to  this  word,  it  is  because  there 
is  no  light  in  me ;"  but  if  I  have  the  Bible  on  my  side, 
though  "  traditions"  be  against  me,  all  the  principali- 
ties and  powers  of  earth  cannot  controvert  God's  truth 
successfully  until  they  have  overturned  his  throne ! 
To  the  Bible  I  appeal,  and  by  the  light  of  this  precious 
book,  I  desire  to  be  guided  in  all  my  inquiries  after 
truth. 

I  shall  probably  be  accused  again,  as  I  have  been 
heretofore,  of  bearing  ill-will  to  Romanists ;  and  the 
publication  of  this  work  will  perhaps  be  resolved  into 
a  malicious  disposition  to  mortify  and  perplex  persons 
of  a  different  religious  creed  from  myself ;  but  this  sin 
will  be  laid  to  my  charge  most  unjustly.  I  can  fear- 
lessly appeal  to  all  who  know  me ;  and  they  will  tes- 
tify that,  both  in  public  and  in  private,  I  have  uniformly 
treated  the  private  members  of  the  Romish  church 
with  kindness  and  respect ;  and  the  Searcher  of  Hearts 
knows  that  I  do  most  heartily  desire  that  even  the  bit- 
terest enemies  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  may  come  to 
the  knowledge  of  the  truth  and  be  saved.  But  this  I 
avow,  and  this,  in  the  face  of  heaven,  I  shall  ever  be 
ready  to  proclaim, — I  hate  Popery !  I  do  hate  it  with 
a  perfect  hatred  !  and  whilst  God  gives  me  life  and 
strength,  I  shall  exert  all  the  power  and  influence 
which  his  providence  and  grace  afford  me,  to  warn 
and  guard  my  fellow-men  against  its  insidious  errors 
and  its  strong  delusions. 

J.  F.  B. 

Philadixphia,  September  1,  1841. 


CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER  I. 

Page 

Mortal  and  Venial  Sin 13 

CHAPTER  n. 
The  Precepts  of  the  Church ' 19 

CHAPTER  HI. 
Infidels  and  Heretics  subject  to  the  Law. 21 

CHAPTER  IV. 
Just  Men  subject  to  the  Law 24 

.      *             CHAPTER  V. 
The  Clergy  subject  to  the  Law 26 

CHAPTER  VL 
The  Decalogue  and  the  First  and  Second  Commandments. . .  30 

CHAPTER  VII. 
The  Third  Commandment  of  the  Decalogue 34 

CHAPTER  VIII. 
The  Fourth  Precept  of  the  Decalogue .41 

CHAPTER  IX. 

Concerning  Grace .'......, 48 

(9) 


X  CONTENTS. 

CHAPTER  X. 
Concerning  Justification '.  57 

CHAPTER  XL 
Concerning  Merit 74 

CHAPTER  Xn. 
Concerning  Theological  Virtues 81 

CHAPTER  Xni. 
Division  of  Faith 85 

CHAPTER  XIV. 
Articles  of  Faith 91 

CHAPTER  XV. 
Vices  opposed  to  the  Faith 104 

CHAPTER  XVI. 
Concerning  Blasphemy 118 

CHAPTER  XVn. 
Rules  of  Faith 122 

CHAPTER  XVIII. 
Traditions,  and  their  divisions 152 

CHAPTER  XIX. 
The  Church 164 

CHAPTER  XX. 
The  Marks  of  the  Church 169 

CHAPTER  XXI. 
The  Infallibility  of  the  Church. . . .  .• 189 


CONTENTS.  Xi 

CHAPTER  XXII. 
Ecclesiastical  Councils. 206 

CHAPTER  XXIII. 
The  Supreme  Pontiff 217 

CHAPTER  XXIV. 
The  Successor  of  Peter  in  the  Primacy 231 

CHAPTER  XXV. 
Theft  and  Rapine '. 247 

CHAPTER  XXVI. 
Of  Suicide 262 

CHAPTER  XXVII. 
Of  Homicide  and  Seduction 270 

CHAPTER  XXVIII. 
Virtue  of  Religion 292 

■     I            CHAPTER  XXIX. 
The  Sign  of  the  Cross 308 

CHAPTER  XXX. 
Magic 312 

CHAPTER  XXXI. 
Lying  and  its  division 316 

CHAPTER  XXXTI. 
Fasting  and  its  division 321 

CHAPTER  XXXIII. 
Worship  and  Invocation  of  Saints , 34? 


Xll  CONTENTS. 

CHAPTER  XXXIV. 
The  Sacraments 356 

CHAPTER  XXXV. 
The  Sacrament  of  Baptism 369 

CHAPTER  XXXVI. 
The  Sacrament  of  Confirmation 389 


CHAPTER  XXXVII. 
*  The  adorable  Sacrament  of  the  Eucharist  . . 


CHAPTER  XXXVIII. 
The  Sacrifice  of  the  Mass 414 

CHAPTER  XXXIX. 
The  Sacrament  of  Penance 438 

CHAPTER  XL. 
Treatise  concerning  Indulgences 479 

CHAPTER  XLI. 
The  Sacrament  of  Extreme  Unction 489 

CHAPTER  XLII. 
The  Sacrament  of  Orders 496 

CHAPTER  XLIII. 
Concerning  Marriage 497 

CHAPTER  XLIV. 
Concerning  Antichrist 501 


SYNOPSIS  OF  DENS'  THEOLOGY, 


CHAPTER  I.  .  . 

CONCERNING  MORTAL  AND  VENIAL  SIN. 
[No.  153.    Vol.  I.] 
Concerning  Mortal  Sin, 

"  What  is  mortal  sin  ? 

"  I.  R.  It  is  that,  which  of  itself  entails  spiritual  death 
upon  the  soul.  Inasmuch  as  it  necessarily  deprives  the  soul 
of  sanctifying  grace,  and  charity,  in  which  the  spiritual  life 
of  the  soul  consists. 

"  II.  The  death  of  the  soul,  therefore,  which  mortal  sin 
induces,  is  not  natural  death :  because  in  this  sense,  the  soul 
is  immortal :  but  spiritual,  consisting  in  the  privation  of  sanc- 
tifying grace." 

[No.  154.] 

Concerning  Venial  Sin. 

"  What  is  venial  sin  ? 

"  I.  That  which  does  not  entail  spiritual  death  upon  the 
soul  —  or  that  which  does  wt  avert  from  the  ultimate  end," 
(i.e.  which  does  not  create  aversion  to  God),  "or  which  is 
only  slightly  repugnant  to  the  right  order  of  reason. 

"  Is  there  any  such  thing  as  venial  sin? 

"  II.  Calvin  taught,  that  all  sins  are,  from  their  nature, 
mortal,  and  worthy  of  eternal  punishment,  J)ut  that  they  are 
not  imputed  to  believers :  so  that,  according  to  himself,  the 
sins  of  believers  may  be  called  venial,  inasmuch  as  they  are 
not  imputed  to  them,  on  account  of  their  condition  ;  but  not 
in  the  sense,  as  though  of  themselves  they  were  not  worthy 
of  eternal  nunishmeiit. 

(13) 


14  MORTAL    AND   VENIAL    SIN. 

"  III.  Approximating  to  this,  is  the  error  of  Bajus  and  a 
few  others,  who  likewise  taught  that  no  sin  is  from  its  nature 
venial ;  and  they  differed  from  Calvin  only  in  this,  that  they 
said  some  sins  were  venial  from  divine  mercy,  whilst  Calvin 
sought  this  from  the  condition  of  sinners.  The  error  of 
Bajus  is  published  in  this  his  20th  proposition.  "  No  sin  is 
from  its  nature  venial,  but  all  sin  deserves  eternal  punish- 
ment." 

*'  IV.  Hence  it  is  certain  that  not  only  from  the  divine  mer- 
cy, but  from  the  nature  of  the  case,  there  are  venial  sins ; 
or  (sins)  so  trivial  that  they  are  consistent  in  just  persons 
with  a  state  of  grace,  and  the  friendship  of  God. 

"  This  is  proved  from  the  Holy  Scripture.  In  Prov.  xxiv. 
16.it  is  said,  "The  just  man  falleth  seven  times:"  and 
James  iii.  2.  "  In  many  things  we  offend  all :"  which  pas- 
sages are  understood  concerning  just  men.  Besides,  Matt. 
vii.  5.  certain  sins  are  compared  to  a  mote  (or  little  splinter) ; 
"  and  then  shalt  thou  see  clearly  to  cast  out  the  mote  out  of 
thy  brother's  eye;"  and  1  Cor.  iii.  12.  to  wood,  hay,  and 
stubble ;  "  But  if  any  one  shall  build  upon  this  foundation — 
wood,  hay,  stubble."  Therefore  these  sins  are  from  their 
nature  light  or  venial.  See  other  passages  from  Scripture 
and  the  Holy  Fathers,  in  relation  to  this  subject,  in  Estius, 
2  dist.  42.  §  4.  It  is  proved  also  from  reason :  in  all  inter- 
course certain  light  offences  occur,  which  do  not  dissolve 
friendship ;  therefore,  also,  there  are  such  in  the  fellowship 
and  friendship,  which  man  has  with  God.  Farther,  every 
sin  does  not  create  aversion  to  God :  therefore  every  sin  is 
not  mortal. 

"  ObJ.  I.  Christ  says.  Matt.  v.  19.  'Whosoever  shall 
break  one  of  the  least  of  these 'commandments  —  shall  be 
called  least  in  the  kingdom  of  heaven ;'  therefore  the  trans- 
gression of  the  least  command  is  mortal. 

"  Ans.  We  deny  the  inference :  for  these  commandments 
are  called  least  only  in  accordance  with  the  false  opinion  of 
the  Pharisees ;  but  in  themselves  they  were  important,  whe- 
ther with  Augustine  you  refer  the  words  of  Christ  to  the 
preceding,  or  with  Chrysostom  to  the  subsequent  things,  such 
as  anger,  injury,  &c. 

"  ObJ.  it.  Christ  says  to  Peter,  John  iii.  8.  "  If  I  do  not 
wash  thee,  thou  hast  no  part  with  me ;"  therefore,  &c. 


MORTAL   AND   VENIAL   SIN.  15 

"ilrts.  We  deny  the  inference:  because  the  refusal  of  Peter, 
which  had  preceded,  was  either  no  sin,  or  at  least  did  not 
exceed  a  venial  offence,  but  if  a  refusal  had  foHowed  the 
severe  reproof  of  Christ,  it  would  have  been  a  grievous  sin 
of  disobedience. 

"  Olj.  III.  Venial  sin  is  not  remitted,  except  through  the 
mercy  of  God  ;  therefore,  this  being  set  aside,  it  merits  eter- 
nal punishment. 

"A?is.  Although  the  remission  of  venial  sin  be  through  the 
mercy  of  God,  yet  it  is  in  a  measure  due  to  a  just  man,  who 
seeks  it ;  for  venial  sin  does  not  destroy  the  divine  friend- 
ship, nor  does  it  destroy  the  principle  of  recovering  from  the 
offence. 

"  Ohj.  IV.  Venial  sin  is  a  greater  evil  than  eternal  punish- 
ment, according  to  No.  149  ;  therefore  it  merits  this  penalty. 

"  Ans,  We  deny  the  inference.  Venial  sin  is  indeed  a 
greater  evil  in  regard  to  the  wrong,  as  it  is  an  offence 
against  the  virtue  of  God,  whereas  the  punishment  would  be 
only  against  the  comfort  of  nature :  but  it  is  not  a  greater 
evil  in  respect  of  demerit ;  thus  therefore  eternal  punishment 
is  due  to  mortal  sin  alone.  See  these  things  more  at  large 
in  Sylvius  &  Wiggers." 

Our  theologian  has  not  been  very  happy  in  his  selection 
of  proof  texts.  It  is  very  true  "  a  just  man  fallelh  seven 
times,"  but  Solomon  adds  what  Peter  Dens  omits,  "  and 
RisETH  UP  AGAIN."  And  how  does  he  rise  up  again  ?  He 
remembers,  whence  he  is  fallen,  and  repents  and  does  his 
first  works.  H6  looks  to  the  blood  of  Christ  for  pardon, 
and  God  accepts  him.  This  distinguishes  the  just  man  from 
the  hypocrite  and  the  sinner,  who  fall  till  seventy  times  seven, 
and  do  not  "  rise  up  again,"  but  sink  to  one  depth  of  degra- 
dation afler  another,  until  they  fall  into  the  perdition  of  the 
ungodly.  The  just  man  is  accepted  afler  falling,  not  because 
his  dereliction  was  venial,  but  because  he  has  risen  up  and 
fled  to  Christ  for  pardon.  But  James  says,  "  In  many  things 
we  offend  all.'  Yes — truly — and  therefore  the  importance 
of  the  Christian's  being  careful  not  to  pass  undue  censure 


16  MORTAL    AND   VENIAL    SIN. 

Upon  others,  and  to  bridle  his  tongue.  The  consideration 
that  "  in  many  things  we  offend  all,"  is  stated  in  this  con- 
nexion to  humble  us,  not  to  encourage  men  in  sin.  But  if 
"  we  offend  in  many  things"  and  are  still  accepted,  are  not 
these  offences  venial  ?  Not  more  so  than  any  other  sins. 
They  must  be  remitted  through  the  virtue  of  that  blood, 
which  cleanseth  from  all  sin,  or  we  cannot  be  accepted,  but 
must  perish — "  The  soul  that  sinneth  it  shall  die." 

But  some  sins  are  compared  to  a  mote,  i.  e.  when,  con- 
trasted with  other  offences,  their  guilt  appears  comparatively 
small. 

Christ  in  this  passage,  Matt.  vii.  5,  is  rebuking  the  hypo- 
crisy of  those  who,  whilst  they  make  great  pretensions  to 
sanctity,  are  themselves  guilty  in  a  far  greater  degree  of  the 
very  offences  which  they  condemn  in  others  ;  they  officiously 
proffer  their  services  to  extract  the  splinter  from  a  brother's 
eye,  whilst  there  is  a  whole  beam  in  their  own  eye.  This 
does  not  prove  that  some  sins  are  venial,  but  it  shows  con- 
clusively that  the  guilt  of  some  men  is  greater  than  that  of 
others.  A  splinter  in  the  eye  will  destroy  the  vision  as 
effectually  as  a  whole  beam,  and  the  soul  will  be  as  cer- 
tainly destroyed  by  the  commission  of  one  act  of  deliberate 
hostility  against  God,  as  by  the  perpetration  of  a  thousand 
crimes.  A  ship  will  as  infallibly  sink  through  the  careless- 
ness of  the  crew  in  neglecting  a  single  leak,  as  though  its 
keel  were  perforated  with  a  thousand  holes. 

But  where  is  the  justice  of  God,  if  all  sins  are  to  be  pun- 
ished alike,  whilst  they  differ  in  the  degree  of  their  guilt  ? 
God  will  punish  with  eternal  death  all  sin,  all  deliberate 
transgression,  which  has  not  been  pardoned  for  the  sake  of 
the  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  But  some  sinners  will  sink  to  a 
lower  hell  than  others,  as  Christ  plainly  intimated  when  he 
told  the  Pharisees,  "  Ye  shall  receive  the  greater  damnation." 
The  drunkard,  who  dies  in  a  fit  of  mania-a-potu,  perishes, 
for  "drunkards  shall  not  inherit  the  kingdom  of  God ;".  but 


MORTAL   AND  VENIAL    SIN.  17 

the  man  who,  for  the  sake  of  filthy  lucre,  pampered  the 
cravings  of  his  victim's  appetite  for  strong  drink,  when  he 
dies  in  his  sins,  "  receives  the  greater  damnation." 

The  poor  Papist,  who  is  devoted  to  the  superstitious  rites 
of  his  religion,  and  who  trusts  his  salvation  to  the  efficacy 
of  penances  and  alms  and  masses,  will  perish  unless  he  re- 
pent— but  the  priest,  who  taught  him  to  deny  the  Lord  that 
bought  him,  and  perverted  his  reason  by  sophistry  and  false- 
hood, will  receive  the  greater  damnation, — ^The  Judge  of 
all  the  earth  will  do  right. 

As  for  the  allusion  to  1  Cor.  iii.  12.  it  is  as  jejune  and  in- 
appropriate as  an  unapt  quotation  well  can  be.  "  If  any  one 
shall  build  upon  this  foundation, — wood,  hay,  stubble,  if  any 
man's  work  shall  be  burnt,  he  shall  suffer  loss,  but  he  him- 
self shall  be  saved ;  yet  so  as  by  fire."  As  this  Scripture 
is  forced  in  as  a  proof  text  to  sustain  the  Romish  distinction 
between  venial  and  mortal  sins,  I  suppose  the  man's  venial 
sins  are  to  be  burnt,  and  thus  he  is  to  suffer  loss.  Good 
riddance  surely  I  But  he  himself  shall  be  saved,  yet  so  as 
by  fire.    Of  course  by  the  fires  of  purgatory. 

The  doctrine  which  is  so  prominently  taught  in  the  stand- 
ards of  the  Romish  church  of  the  distinction  between  mortal 
and  venial  sin,  is  prima  facie  evidence,  that  the  whole  system 
is  directly  at  variance  with  the  Word  of  God.  Sin  in  every 
form  and  degree  is  the  abominable  thing  which  He  hates. 
The  wrath  of  God  is  revealed  from  heaven  against  all  un- 
righteousness. Fallen  man  in  the  pride  of  his  selfish  heart 
graduates  the  degrees  of  guilt  attached  to  various  crimes, 
according  to  the  extent  to  which  they  affect  his  comfort  and 
security  in  this  world.  Thus,  thefl  and  murder  are  great 
sins,  but  profanity  and  Sabbath-breaking  are  little  sins,  be- 
cause the  latter  do  not  so  immediately  trench  upon  the 
rights  and  interests  of  society.  But  God  judges  by  another 
rule.  He  looks  at  the  heart,  and  in  the  enmity  of  the  car- 
nal mind  he  sees  the  secret  fountain,  from  which  all  the 


18  MORTAL   AND  VENIAL   SIN. 

streams  of  depravity  proceed.  This  alienation  of  heart  is 
the  sin  which  he  hates — and  it  is  developed  as  clearly  to  the 
eye  of  God  in  the  most  secret  thoughts,  and  the  most  trifling 
actions  of  the  unregenerate  man,  as  it  is  to  our  view  in  the 
most  appalling  exhibitions  of  depravity. 

When  the  Spirit  of  God  has  renovated  the  heart,  changed 
the  bias  of  the  will,  enlightened  the  understanding,  and 
nerved  us  with  moral  strength,  we  are  minded  to  obey — it  is 
our  meat  and  our  drink  to  serve  God.  We  cannot  sin  as 
the  unregenerate  do,  who  hate  God  with  a  perfect  hatred, 
though  we  may  be  overtaken  in  a  fault ;  we  may  fall  as 
many  of  the  mighty  have  done,  but  we  believe  that  though 
the  just  man  fall  seven  times,  he  will  rise  up  again,  fly  to 
Christ  for  pardon,  and  finally  be  accepted  in  the  beloved — 
not  because  any,  or  the  least  of  his  sins  were  venial,  but  be- 
cause the  blood  of  Jesus  Christ  cleanseth  from  all  sin. 

Our  limits  will  not  permit  us  to  follow  the  author  through 
the  intricacies  of  his  nice  distinctions  between  mortal  and 
venial  sin.  Suffice  it  to  say,  that  there  are  no  less  than 
twenty-one  numbers  or  chapters  relating  to  this  subject.  The 
156th  No.  commences  with  the  following  words : 

"  Although  mortal  sin  is  far  removed  from  venial,  it  is  ex- 
tremely difficult  to  discover,  and  very  dangerous  to  define, 
which  is  mortal,  and  which  venial ;  so  that  these  are  mat- 
ters which  ought  to  be  considered  not  by  a  human,  but  a 
divine  mind,  as  Enchiridius  remarks,"  &c. 

After  this  statement,  we  know  not  whether  most  to  admire 
the  theological  acumen  or  the  modesty  of  the  author,  por- 
trayed in  the  twenty  chapters,  which  immediately  succeed 
this  avowal  of  the  difficulty  and  danger  of  the  enterprise. 
The  reader  would  probably  be  very  little  edified  by  a  perusal 
of  Peter  Dens'  theological  prose  relative  to  such  points  as 
"  The  difference  between  mortal  and  venial  sin,"  "Rules  for 
distinguishing  mortal  sih  from  venial,"  &c.,  "  The  ways  in 


PRECEPTS  OF  THE  CHURCH.  19 

which  mortal  sin  becomes  venial,  and  in  which  venial  be- 
comes mortal,"  &c. 

In  the  treatise  concerning  conscience  which  succeeds  the 
disquisition  on  mortal  and  venial  sin,  the  following  subjects 
are  discussed :  "  Rules  of  human  actions."  "  Definition  of 
conscience."  "  Division  of  conscience."  "  Of  acting  against 
conscience."  "  Of  acting  according  to  conscience."  "  The 
mode  of  deposing  an  erroneous  conscience."  *'  The  safe 
rule  of  action."  "  Of  the  conscience,  which  is  the  safe  rule 
of  acting."  "  Of  conduct,  which  is  safe,  safer,  and  not  so 
safe."  "Doubtful  conscience."  "Perplexed  conscience." 
"  Of  probability."  "  Probable  conscience."  "  Of  opinions 
more  probable  but  less  safe."  "  Of  the  most  probable  opin- 
ion." "Scrupulous  conscience."  "The  causes  of  scru- 
ples." "  Remedies  of  scruples."  "  The  confessor  of  the 
scrupulous," — i.  e.  how  the  confessor  ought  to  proceed  with 
a  scrupulous  person.  It  will  be  apparent  from  the  preceding 
captions  that  there  is  a  considerable  assortment  of  conscience 
offered  to  the  faithful,  and  he  must  be  very  fastidious,  who 
cannot  be  accommodated. 


CHAPTER  11. 

[No.  23.     Vol.  II.] 

Concerning  the  Precepts  of  the  Church. 

"  I.  Precepts  of  the  church  necessary  to  be  known  are 
five. 

"  What  are  the  principal  precepts  of  the  church,  concern- 
ing all  Christ's  faithful? 

"  I.  Although  the  precepts  of  the  church  are  very  numer- 
ous, both  in  canon  law,  and  in  councils  and  constitutions  of 


20        PRECEPTS  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

the  Popes,  yet  five  are  specially  propounded  in  the  catechisms 
as  necessary  to  be  known  and  observed  by  all :  they  are  the 
following ; 

*'  II.  1 .  Celebrate  the  festivals  appointed  by  the  church. 

*'  2.  On  festivals  reverently  hear  the  sacred"  office  of  the 


"  3.  Observe  the  fasts  appointed  on  certain  days,  and  ab- 
stinence from  some  kinds  of  food. 

*'  4.  Confess  your  sins  every  year  to  your  own  priest,  or 
to  another  with  his  permission. 

"5.  Receive  the  most  holy  Eucharist,  at  least  once  a 
year,  and  that  about  Easter."       ***** 

This  is  the  Papist's  way  of  salvation ;  by  these  meritori- 
ous works,  heaven  is  secured  to  all  the  faithful !  ,  It  may 
well  be  questioned  whether  another  system  of  delusion  could 
be  invented,  which  would  at  once  more  effectually  lead  cap- 
tive the  carnal  mind  and  gratify  the  natural,  self-righteous- 
ness of  the  human  heart.  The  observance  of  these  five 
precepts  constitutes  a  good  Catholic,  and  an  heir  of  ever- 
lasting life  !  It  is  beneath  sober  demonstration  to  show  that 
a  sinner  may  observe  these  five  precepts  and  five  thousand 
more  of  the  same  kind,  and  yet  be  an  utter  stranger  to  the 
renewing  grace  of  God.  Or,  are  we  to  suppose  that  regen- 
eration consists  in  obedience  to  these  five  rules  ?  If  so, 
show  us  a  single  one  of  them  in  the  Bible ;  or  point  out  even 
in  the  corrupted  Doway  version  the  authority  upon  which 
these  five  precepts  are  based.  You  look  for  them  in  vain  in 
God's  word — and  no  wonder,  for  they  are  inventions  of  the 
Man  of  Sin. 


INFIDELS  AND  HERETICS.  21 

CHAPTER  III. 

[No.  27.   Vol.  II.] 

Concerning  Injidels  and  Heretics  subject  to  the  Lmo. 

"  I.  Injidels  are  not  hound  hy  the  laws  of  the  church, 
II.  Heretics,  c^c,  are  bound  by  them.  III.  Whether  it  is 
lawful  to  give  meats  to  heretics  on  a  fast  day. 

"Are  infidels  and  heretics  bound  by  the  laws? 

"J.ns.  1.  They  are  all  bound  by  the  eternal  and  natural 
law,  also  by  positive  divine  laws. 

"  2.  Infidels  or  unbaptized  persons  are  not  held  by  the  posi- 
tive laws  of  the  church ;  because  they  are  not  subject  to  the 
church ;  hence  the  apostle  says,  1  Cor.  v.  12.  *  What  have 
I  to  do  to  judge  them  that  are  without  V 

"  It  is  inferred  if  such  persons  eat  meats  on  a  day  of  ec- 
clesiastical fast,  that  they  do  not  sin  against  the  law  of  the 
church,  nor  indeed  does  he  who  furnishes  meats  to  them  ; 
unless  they  should  eat  these  meats  in  contempt  of  the  church. 

"  II.  3.  Heretics,  schismatics,  apostates  and  all  such  bap- 
tized persons,  are  bound  by  the  laws  of  the  church,  which 
concern  them :  because  through  baptism  they  have  become 
subject  to  the  church  ;  nor  are  they  any  more  absolved  from 
her  laws,  than  subjects  rebelling  against  their  lawful  prince 
(are  absolved)  from  the  laws  of  the  prince. 

"  Do  heretics  therefore  sin,  when  they  do  not  observe  the 
fasts  and  feasts  appointed  by  the  church  ?  ■ 

"  Certainly  :  unless  they  may  be  excused  for  some  cause, 
as  for  instance,  ignorance. 

"  ObJ.  I.  Heretics  are  not  in  the  church ;  therefore  they 
are  not  subject  to  the  church. 

"  Ans.  It  is  true,  heretics  are  not- in  the  church  as  to  the 
union  of  charity  and  the  communion  of  the  saints ;  but 
though  they  are  not  in  the  church  as  to  subjection,  on  the 
other  hand,  by  baptism  they  are  subject  to  the  church,  and 
remain  personally  subject  to  the  church,  wherever  they  may 
have  been. 


22  INFIDELS  AND  HERETICS. 

"  Obj.  II.  The  church  seems  to  relax  her  laws  in  respect 
to  heretics ;  because  by  urging  the  observance  of  the  rules 
she  can  expect  no  good  effect,  but  rather  sins  and  offences 
against  God  on  their  part. 

"  Ans.  We  deny  the  antecedent" — -(viz.  that  the  church 
seems  to  relax  her  laws,  &c.) — "  the  contrary  is  evident 
from  the  mind  of  the  whole  church.  The  church  accom- 
modates herself  to  their  sins  only  permissively  for  higher 
reasons ;  lest,  for  instance,  she  might  appear  to  the  manifest 
scandal  of  the  faithful  to  favour  heresy,  whilst  heretics 
through  their  obstinacy  obtain  an  advantage,  and  are  freed 
from  the  burdens  of  laws  to  which  the  faithful  are  subjected. 
Besides  the  same  reason  for  relaxing  (the  laws)  would  hold 
good  for  all  the  evils  of  Christendom. 

"  Is  it  lawful  in  this  Catholic  country  to  place  meats  on 
the  table  before  heretics  on  holidays  or  fast  days? 

"III.  We  reply  with  Daelman  and  Billuart  that  this  is 
permitted  to  tavern-keepers,  in  the  case  of  those  heretics  who 
remain  in  the  country  through  necessity  or  some  important 
reason :  for  the  consequences  of  being  in  the  country  must 
be  conceded  to  those,  to  whom  permission  is  granted  to  be 
in  the  country :  thus  meats  are  sold  and  given  to  heretical 
soldiers  in  time  of  war. 

"  But  if  any  heretic  should  be  in  the  country  for  purposes 
of  pleasure,  trade  or  any  other  similar  cause,  it  is  not 
thought  that  any  necessity  or  sufficient  cause  is  afforded ; 
whence  it  appears  not  lawful  for  innkeepers,  much  less  for 
others,  to  place  meats  before  such  an  one  on  forbidden  days  : 
but  they  can  properly  reply  to  the  heretic  that  they  do  not 
prepare  meats  to  be  eaten  on  that  day,  in  accordance  with 
the  laws  of  the  church  and  the  customs  of  the  country. 

"  The  case  is  different  under  the  government  of  heretics, 
when  innkeepers  give  meats  to  those  who  ask  for  them ;  be- 
cause otherwise  they  might  be  regarded  as  disturbers  of  the 
republic.     See  No.  274,  on  Temperance." 

This  is  not  the  place  to  speak  of  the  peculiarity  of  the 
Romish  church  which  Paul  describes  when  he  tells  of  some 
who  shall  command  to  abstain  from  meats,  which  God  hath 
created  to  be  received  with  thanksgiving  of  them  which  be- 
lieve and  know  the  truth."     That  subject  will  come  up  in  its 


SUBJECT  TO  THE  LAW.  23 

proper  place.  We  shall  confine  ourselves  to  the  niain  ques- 
tion of  the  section.  It  will  be  seen  from  the  above  that  Holy 
Church  considers  even  Protestants  as  bound  to  abstain  from 
meats  on  the  fast  days  appointed  by  her.  We  are  all  bound 
by  her  laws  forsooth,  "  because  through  baptism  we  have 
become  subject  to  the  church ;"  she  claims  all  the  jurisdic- 
tion over  us,  which  she  exercises  over  her  own  priest-ridden 
subjects.     We  are  not  anv  more  absolved  from  her 

LAWS,  TUAN  REBELLIOUS  SUBJECTS  ARE  ABSOLVED  FROM 
THE  LAWS  OF  THE  PRINCE  FROM  WHOM  THEY  HAVE  RE- 
VOLTED I 

The  arrogance  of  this  dogma  would  -excite  the  reader's 
indignation,  if  its  absurdity  did  not  provoke  his  ridicule.  If 
Holy  Mother  should  ever  regain  the  influence  she  has  lost, 
we  apprehend  some  heretics  would  continue  to  commit  mor- 
tal sin  by  secretly  eating  meat  on  Friday  ;  and  why  should 
they  not  ?  they  might  readily  avail  themselves  of  the  expe- 
dient, said  to  have  been  successfully  employed  by  a  Romish 
priest,  whose  bowels  yearned  over  a  fine  roast  of  beef  which 
had  been  sent  to  his  Reverence,  whether  by  one  of  the  faith- 
ful, or  by  a  heretic,  we  cannot  say.  The  priest  was  in  a 
dilemma  as  the  present  was  sent  on  a  Friday,  and  he  was 
hungry  and  very  partial  to  beef;  he  adopted  an  expedient, 
however,  which  extricated  him  from  the  difficulty  without 
wounding  his  conscience.  Having  procured  a  fish-hook  he 
took  his  beef  to  the  river,  saying  as  he  let  it  down  into 
the  water,  and  drew  it  up,  "  Go  down  beef!  Come  up  fish !" 
The  miracle  was  complete,  and  the  priest  eat  the  beef  as  fish. 
To  be  sure  it  looked  as  much  like  beef  and  tasted  as  much 
like  beef  as  though  its  nature  had  not  been  changed ;  but 
this  fact  could  not  possibly  disturb  the  equanimity  of  a  de- 
vout believer  in  transubstantiation.  Certainly  it  was  as  easy 
for  his  Reference  to  change  flesh  into  fish  as  to  change  a 
bit  of  bread  into  the  body  and  blood,  soul  and  divinity  of 
the  Saviour,  by  simply  saying  with  the  proper  intention, 
"  hoc  est  corpus  meum." 


afo^_ 


24  JUST  MEN  SUBJECT  TO  THE  LAW. 

CHAPTER  IV. 

[No.  28.     Vol.  II.] 

Concerning  Just  Men  subject  to  the  Law. 

"  Are  just  and  spiriti>al  men  subject  to  the  law  ? 

"  I.  Yes :  so  the  Council  of  Trent  has  decided.  It  is 
proved  by  the  apostle  (Rom.  xiii.  1.)  where  he  says,  "  Let 
every  soul  be  subject  to  the  higher  powers,"  and  Heb.  xiii. 
17.  "  Obey  them  that  have  the  rule  over  you  and  submit 
yourselves."  These  texts  are  general  and  therefore  they 
include  all  just  men  also. 

"  Obj.  I.  Rom.  vi.  14,  the  apostle  says  to  Christians, 
*  Ye  are  not  under  the  law  but  under  grace ;'  therefore,  &c. 

"  Ans.  The  meaning  is :  Ye  are  not  under  the  Mosaic 
law,  which  has  now  ceased,  but  under  the  grace  of  the  new 
law. 

"  Obj.  I.  Tim.  i.  9,  it  is  said  *  The  law  is  not  made  for  a 
righteous  man ;'  therefore  the  righteous  is  not  subject  to  the 
law. 

"  Ans.  I  deny  the  inference :  the  meaning  is,  that  the  law 
is  not  made  for  a  righteous  man,  that  it  may  terrify  him 
with  threats  and  punishments,  and  thus  compel  him  to  its 
observance ;  because  righteous  men  observe  the  law  of  their 
own  accord  ;  but  it  consists  with  this,  that  the  law  is  made 
for  the  righteous  man,  in  order  to  his  direction. 

"  II.  It  is  to  be  observed,  that  men  may  be  said  to  be  sub- 
ject to  the  law  in  a  twofold  manner ;  in  one  way  as  to  pre- 
ceptive authority,  in  the  other  way  as  to  compulsory  author- 
ity ;  for  in  every  law  two  things  are  to  be  considered ;  one, 
that  the  law  is  a  rule  of  morals,  because  it  shows,  directs 
and  obliges ;  and  these  things  belong  to  the  preceptive  au- 
thority of  the  law;  the  other,  because  the  law  imposes  or 
inflicts  punishments,  and  in  so  far  terrifies  and  compels; 
which  relates  to  the  compulsory  power  of  the  law." 


LEGISLATOR  AS  SUBJECT  TO  THE  LAW.         25 

[No.  29.] 
Concerning  the  Legislator  as  subject  to  the  Law, 

"  Is  the  legislator  bound  by  the  laws,  which  he  himself 
has  made  ? 

"  I.  If  the  legislator  holds  monarchical  rule,  as  the  Pope, 
a  king,  a  bishop,  &c.,  or  if  he  is  sole  absolute  lord,  he  is 
not  held  by  his  laws  as  to  their  compulsory  power,  but  cer- 
tainly in  their  preceptive  authority,  at  least  indirectly,  since 
the  laws  equally  concern  himself  and  his  subjects. 

"  II.  That  he  is  not  held  as  to  their  compulsory  authority 
is  manifest :  because  as  he  is  the  supreme  prince,  he  can  be 
compelled  by  none  of  those  to  whom  the  law  is  directed,  to 
the  observance  of  his  own  law. 

"  III.  That  he  is  bound  as  to  their  preceptive  authority,  is 
proved  from  this,  because  right  reason  dictates,  that  the 
head  should  be  conformed  to  the  members.  Besides  it  is 
proper  that  a  legislator  in  his  own  conduct  should  concur  in 
the  common  good,  and  therefore  in  the  observance  of  his 
own  laws — for  as  nothing  is  more  injurious  than  that  the 
legislator  should  not  be  the  first  to  observe  the  law,  so  no- 
thing is  more  beneficial  than  that  he  should  be  the  first  to 
conform  himself  to  it,  &c.         ***** 

"  From  this  it  is  inferred  that  the  Pope  is  obliged  to  hear 
Mass  on  a  festival  day,  to  fast  on  a  fast  day,  and  generally 
to  do  such  things  as  relate  to  preceptive  authority :  yet  if 
excommunication  or  any  other  punishment  should  be  appoint- 
ed against  transgressors,  he  would  not  incur  it  ,*  because 
these  things  relate  to  the  coercive  authority. 

"  Is  the  supreme  legislator  obliged  under  pain  of  mortal 
sin,  to  observe  his  law  in  an  important  case? 

"  Ans.  If  the  danger  of  grievous  scandal  or  of  manifest 
injury  to  a  third  person,  is  to  be  feared  from  the  transgres- 
sion, according  to  all  (authors)  he  sins  mortally ;  but  whe- 
ther, apart  from  these  things,  he  sins  mortally  is  not  agreed 
among  authors.  Some  deny  it,  on  the  ground  that  the  legis- 
lator is  bound  to  obey  his  oivn  law,  only  by  a  certain  na- 
tural propriety  J  which  apart  from  scandal  or  some  other 
weighty  circumstance,  seems  a  matter  of  little  moment j^^  S^c. 


26  THE  CLERGY  SUBJECT  TO  THE  LAWS. 

The  reader  will  learn  from  the  last  paragraph,  that  ac- 
cording to  Romish  theology,  the  great  cardinal  virtue  is  "  to 
keep  up  appearances."  The  Pope  or  those  in  authority  may 
do  as  they  list,  but  they  must  avoid  scandal  or  else  they  sin 
mortally.  No  doubt  his  Holiness  and  his  sanctimonious 
Priests  are  great  admirers  of  the  Spartan  rogue,  who,  rather 
than  betray  his  theft,  suffered  a  fox  which  he  had  stolen  and 
secreted  under  his  robe,  to  tear  out  his  entrails. 


CHAPTER  V. 

[No.  30.     Vol.  II.] 

Concerning  the  Clergy  subject  to  the  Laws. 

*'  Are  the  clergy  subject  to  human  laws  ? 

"  I.  It  is  beyond  controversy  that  the  clergy  are  subject  to 
the  ecclesiastical  laws,  which  concern  them,  both  as  to  com- 
pulsory and  preceptive  authority. 

"  Therefore  here  is  chiefly  meant,  whether,  and  how  far 
they  are  subject  to  civil  laws  1 

"  II.  The  clergy  are  under  obligation  to  civil  laws,  which 
are  not  contrary  to  the  clerical  order,  or  to  ecclesiastical 
privilege,  so  far  as  preceptive  authority  is  concerned :  thus 
they  are  obliged  to  preserve  the  value  of  coin ;  not  to  take 
grain  out  of  the  country,  if  that  is  forbidden,  &c. 

*'  But  because  a  layman  has  no  authority  over  the  persons 
of  clergymen,  Suarez  and  several  canonists  teach  that  the 
clergy  are  only  indirectly  obliged  by  those  laws ;  as  was 
said  in  the  preceding  No.  concerning  the  legislator :  foras- 
much as  in  a  similar  case,  a  part  should  conform  itself  to 
the  whole  community,  and  because  the  canons  teach,  that 
the  clergy  should  observe  laws  of  this  kind. 

"  III.  But  if  the  civil  laws  are  adverse  to  the  immunity  of 
the  clergy,  or  if  they  relate  to  a  matter,  in  which  the  clergy 
are  exempt  from  secular  power,  by  such  (laws)  the  clergy 
are  not  held  either  as  to  their  preceptive  or  compulsory  au- 
thority.    The  reason  is,  because  in  such  respects,  the  cler- 


THE  CLERGY  SUBJECT  TO  THE  LAWS.    27 

gy  are  by  no  means  subject  to  the  secular  power :  thus  a 
clergyman  is  not  obliged  to  stand  sentinel,  to  perform  mili- 
tary duty,  &c. 

"  What  the  matter  of  ecclesiastical  immunity  is,  &c.,  see 
briefly  in  the  treatise  concerning  Religion,  No.  196,  &c. 

"  IV.  Persons  belonging  to  religious  orders  are  exempt ; 
and  are  declared  to  be  so,  because  in  some  respects  they  are 
exempt  from  the  jurisdiction  of  Bishops,  and  are  subject  im- 
mediately to  the  Apostolic  See ;  but  although  they  are  not 
subject  to  the  Bishop  in  those  things  which  relate  to  regular 
discipline,  yet  they  ought  to  obey  in  those  things  which  re- 
late to  the  administration  of  the  sacraments  among  the  laity ; 
also  in  those  which  relate  to  the  preaching  of  the  Word  of 
God,  and  the  performance  of  public  offices,  beyond  the  mo- 
nastery," &c. 

The  chapters  under  the  captions  "  Concerning  the  obliga- 
gation  of  laws,"  and  "  The  end  and  ways  of  fulfilling  the 
law,"  contain  little  or  nothing  of  special  interest  to  the  gene- 
ral reader.  If  our  limits  would  admit  of  it,  we  would  in- 
sert a  translation  of  some  of  the  sections  concerning  "  Dis- 
pensations," but  a  brief  sketch  of  a  few  of  the  more  im- 
portant principles  involved  in  this  Babylonish  privilege  must 
suffice. 

"  What  is  a  dispensation  1 
"     "  Ans.  It  is  a  relaxation  of  a  law  in  a  particular  case,  by 
the  authority  of  a  superior,  the  matter  and  the  law  remain-, 
ing  unchanged  in  general." 

The  right  of  granting  dispensations  from  the  eternal  and 
natural  law  of  God  is  disclaimed.  This,  it  is  affirmed,  be- 
longs to  God  alone,  or  to  him  who  has  received  a  special 
commission  to  that  effect.  God  will  grant  no  dispensation 
from  his  laws,  because  that  would  be  denying  himself. 

"  That  the  church  has  the  power  of  absolving  from  vows 
and  oaths  is  proved  from  the  general  concession  of  Christ, 
Matt.  xvi.  19.  *  Whatsoever  thou  shalt  loose  upon  earth  shall 
be  loosed  in  heaven.'  Besides,  the  perpetual  practice  of  the 
church  sustains  it.  Yet  this  is  not  properly  called  a  dispen- 
sation, but  the  matter  is  changed,  inasmuch  as  God  re- 


28    THE  CLERGY  SUBJECT  TO  THE  LAWS. 

NOUNCES     HIS     RIGHT    THROUGH    THE    SUPERIORS     OP    THE 
CHURCH,  AND  THUS  THE    OBLIGATION    CEASES    OF  ITS    OWN 

ACCORD."  ! !     (See  No.  63,  towards  the  close.) 

This,  arrogant  blasphemy  is  a  striking  illustration  of  the 
daring  presumption  of  the  Man  of  Sin,  "  who  exalteth  him- 
self above  all  that  is  called  God  or  is  worshipped." 

"  The  Pope,  as  he  is  the  Superior  of  the  Universal  Church, 
grants  dispensations  in  all  laws  which  belong  to  ecclesiasti- 
cal right ;  even  in  the  laws  of  his  own  predecessors,  of 
Bishops,  of  all  Councils,  even  general  ones,  and  that  inde- 
pendently of  the  question,  whether  the  Pope  is  above  the 
Council ;  because  indeed,  according  to  all,  he  is  the  head  of 
the  church,  the  guardian  of  the  canons,  and  the  dispenser 
of  the  whole  economy  of  the  church."   (No.  64.) 

The  dispensing  jurisdiction  of  the  Pope  it  is  said  extends 
only  to  matters  of  ecclesiastical  law  and  order ;  cases  which 
belong  to  faith  and  morals,  are  beyond  his  reach,  and  be- 
long to  the  divine  right.  But  what  of  that  ?  Supposing  the 
Pope  finds  it  to  his  advantage  to  transcend  these  limits,  what 
shall  hinder  him  from  doing  as  his  predecessors  have  done 
before  him  ?  The  range  of  ecclesiastical  law  is  so  exten- 
sive, and  the  logic  of  Rome  so  subtle  and  ingenious,  that 
there  are  few  cases  which  cannot  be  forced  within  an  eccle- 
siastical economy,  which  arrogates  to  itself  all  spiritual  and 
temporal  supremacy. 

The  dispensing  power  of  the  Bishop  is  confined  to  his 
own  diocesfe,  and  extends  to  cases  either  expressly  conceded 
by  the  Pope  or  granted  by  the  general  Councils  of  the 
church.  He  gives  dispensations  from  the  observance  of  fast- 
days,  festivals,  &c.,  or  in  a  case  of  necessity  which  does 
not  permit  the  delay  of  a  special  recurrence  to  Rome ;  hence 
sometimes  when  there  are  impediments  in  the  way  of  mar- 
riage, the  Bishop  employs  his  dispensing  power.  Ord.'nary 
priests  have  not  properly  the  right  of  dispensation — but  in 
parishes  which  are  rather  remote  from  the  Bishop's  residence, 
they  may  with  his  consent  afford  dispensations  from  fasting, 
&c.   (No.  65.) 


THE  CLERGY  SUBJECT  TO  THE  LAWS.     29 

There  must  be  a  sufficient  reason  for  affording  the  dis- 
pensation ;  necessity,  or  utility,  or  piety  must  render  it  ex- 
pedient, for  if  the  indulgence  is  conceded  without  just  cause, 
it  involves  the  dispenser  in  guilt  proportionate  to  the  nature 
of  the  case. 

The  doctors  of  the  Romish  church  will  differ,  however, 
like  other  doctors,  notwithstanding  their  matchless  unity  in 
matters  of  faith.  Some  affirming  that  arbitrary  dispensa- 
tions entail  mortal  sin  upon  the  Bishop,  others  that  such 
offences  are  merely  venial.  (No.  67.)  It  is  not  for  us  to 
decide,  when  such  doctors  differ,  and  we  prefer  therefore 
leaving  the  question  to  the  casuistry  of  those,  whom  it  spe- 
cially concerns. 

There  is  also  great  discrepancy  between  the  opinions  of 
different  authors  relative  to  another  very  important  question, 
to  wit :  "  whether  a  dispensation  obreptitiously  or  surrepti- 
tiously obtained,  is  valid."  A  dispensation  is  said  to  be  sur- 
reptitious, when  obtained  by  concealing  the  truth ;  and  ob- 
reptitious,  when  obtained  by  telling  a  falsehood.  Now  the 
Romish  doctors  cannot  arrive  at  a  unanimous  conclusion 
relative  to  the  validity  of  such  dispensations.  There  are 
several  hairs  to  be  split  before  any  thing  like  a  sound  con- 
clusion can  be  attained.  Whether,  e.  g.,  the  surreptition  or 
obreptition  concerns  the  final  or  only  the  impulsive  cause, 
will  materially  affect  the  case. 

The  final  or  motive  cause  is  "  that,  which  principally 
moves  the  superior  to  grant  the  dispensation ;  so  that,  in  its 
absence,  the  dispensation  would  either  by  no  means  have 
been  given,  or  not  without  trouble  and  compensationi  or  at 
least  not  in  such  a  form." 

"  That  cause  is  called  impulsive,  which  indeed  induces  the 
superior  to  grant  the  favour  more  readily,  but  in  the  absence 
of  which,  he  would  have  granted  (the  dispensation)  absolutely 
and  in  the  same  form. 

"  Let  this  serve  as  an  illustration  of  botLpauses  :  some  one 
gives  alms  to  a  poor  man,  which  he  affonfcs'the  more  readily, 
3 


30  FIRST  AND  SECOND  COMMANDiVIENT. 

because  he  believes  him   to   be    honest ;    here,   the   man's 
poverty  is  the  Jinal,  and  his  probity  the  impulsive  cause." 

Having  given  my  reader  the  clue  afforded  by  Peter  Dens, 
I  must  leave  him  to  find  his  way  out  of  the  labyrinth  of  "  dis- 
tinguos"  as  he  best  can.  Of  course,  every  honourable 
mind  will  instinctively  venerate  the  purity  of  those  holy 
doctors  who  cannot  determine  whether  falsehood  and  deceit 
can  invalidate  a  case  or  not.  From  the  premises  which 
some  of  them  assume,  the  inference  is  fair  that  the  more 
proficiency  a  man  has  made  in  deceit  and  falsehood,  the 
more  readily  he  can  be  favoured  with  a  dispensation. 

For  our  part  we  know  not  which  most  to  admire,  the 
knavery  of  the  man  who  gives,  or  the  folly  of  him  who 
accepts,  a  Popish  indulgence. 


CHAPTER   VI. 

[No.  78.     Vol.  II.] 

The  Decalogue,  and  the  First  and  Second  Commandment. 

"  What  is  the  first  precept  of  the  Decalogue  ? 

*' Ans.  The  first  and  greatest  is  this,  '  Thou  shalt  not  have 
strange  gods  before  me,'  &c. 

"  What  is  forbidden  by  this  precept  ? 

"  Aws.  It  is  forbidden  to  regard  any  thing  else  as  God,  ex- 
cept the  true  God,  and  in  any  manner  to  offer  to  any  other 
thing,  that  which  pertains  to  God  alone;  for  the  words 
*  strange  gods'  are  equivalent  to  *  other  gods,'  as  is  plain 
from  the  text  in  Hebrew  and  Greek. 

"  By  this  precept,  therefore,  idolatry,  divination,  and  all 
superstition  of  every  name,  are  forbidden. 

"  *  Before  me,'  is  added :  an-d  this  denotes  that  God  is  every- 
where present ;  and  at  the  same  time  gives  great  emphasis 
in  order  to  signify  that  the  sin  is  aggravated  from  the  fact 
that  it  is  done  openly  and  directly  in  the  presence  of  God. 

"  What  does  this  part  prohibit,  '  Thou  shalt  not  make  to 
thyself  a  graven  thing  ?' 


FIRST  AND  SECOND  COMMANDMENT.  31 

Ans.  The  same  as  the  preceding  words — thou  shall  have 
no  other  gods:  for,  as  St.  Augustine  teaches,  quest.  71  on 
Exod.,  it  is  only  a  kind  of  explanation  of  the  preceding  part, 
prohibiting  idols  and  images  to  be  made  in  the  manner  of  the 
Gentiles,  who  consecrated  them,  and  supposed  that  by  this 
consecration  a  certain  divine  power  was  included  in  them ; 
as  is  plain  from  Cicero's  speech  against  Verres ;  and  hence 
they  worshipped  them  also  with  the  veneration  of  latria,^''* 

"  From  which  it  is  plain  that  nothing  can  be  deduced  from 
this  passage  against  the  worship  of  holy  images ;  for  the 
Holy  Scripture  itself  does  not  simply  prohibit  graven  images 
and  pictures :  but  only  in  this  sense,  that  no  one  may  adore 
them,  or  worship  them  with  the  veneration  of  latria  ;  but  in 
this  way  Christians  do  not  adore  images,  neither  do  they 
believe  that  they  possess  any  innate  virtue. 

*'  Prove  that  it  was  not  forbidden  to  make  these  images. 

*'  It  is  plainly  proved  :  for,  Exod.  xxv.  18.,  we  read,  that 
likenesses  and  images  of  cherubim  were  made  by  Moses  at 
the  command  of  God,  near  the  ark  of  the  Lord ;  and,  3 
Kings  (i.  e.  1  Kings)  vi.  23,  the  same  was  done  by  Solomon 
in  the  temple ;  also,  Num.  xxi.  9,  by  the  command  of  God, 
Moses  erected  a  brazen  serpent,  that  by  looking  at  it  those 
who  had  been  bitten  by  the  fiery  serpent  might  be  healed. 

"Moreover,  although  every  kind  of  images  whatsoever 
had  been  forbidden  to  the  Hebrews,  that  precept  to  such  an 
extent  would  have  been  ceremonial,  and  therefore  would  now 
cease,  as  St.  Thomas  remarks,  &c. 

"  What  is  commanded  by  the  first  precept  of  the  Deca- 
logue ? 

"  I  answer  with  the  Roman  catechism  thus  :  '  Thou  shalt 
worship  me  the  true  God ;'  or,  Thou  shalt  hold  me  the  only 
true  God,  in  faith,  hope,  and  charity,  and  thou  shalt  worship 
me  alone  with  the  veneration  of  latria." 

The  division  of  the  commandments  of  the  Decalogue, 
which  obtains  in  the  Romish  church,  is  decidedly  objection- 

*  Papists  make  a  distinction  between  the  worship  which  they  offer 
to  God,  and  that  which  they  give  to  their  saints  and  images ;  the  for- 
mer is  called  "latria,"  and  tlie  latter  "dulia."  The  veneration  of  the 
Virgin  Mary  occupies  a  kind  of  middle  groupd,  and  is  called  "hyper- 
dulia." 


32  FIRST  AND  SECOND  COMIMANDMENT. 

able.  The  second  precept,  which  is  as  distinctly  marked  as 
any  other,  ought  not  to  be  attached  as  a  mere  appendage  or 
explanation  of  the  first.  In  Romish  catechisms,  the  first 
two  precepts  of  the  Decalogue  are  amalgamated,  and  in 
order  to  make  out  the  full  complement  of  ten  the  last  com- 
mandment is  broken  into  two.  There  is  something  gained 
by  representing  the  positive  and  explicit  prohibition,  *'  Thou 
shalt  not  make  to  thyself  any  graven  image,  or  the  likeness, 
&c."  as  a  mere  amplification  of  the  first  precept,  because  it 
affords  a  meagre  excuse  for  omitting  the  second  command- 
ment, in  nearly  all  the  Popish  catechisms  which  are  pub- 
lished throughout  the  world.  And  yet,  were  it  not  for  the 
"strong  delusions"  of  this  abominable  system,  it  would 
be  a  difficult  matter  for  any  honest  man  to  reconcile  himself 
to  the  "  due  veneration  of  holy  images,"  required  of  him  by 
the  Romish  authorities  with  the  import  of  such  language  as 
that  in  Exodus  xx.  4,  5,  6. 

The  distinction  between  latria  and  dulia  is  a  Popish  in- 
vention, for  which  there  is  no  warrant  in  the  Bible.  Men 
are  forbidden  in  the  word  of  God  to  "  bow  down  to  or  before 
graven  images,  or  likenesses  of  any  thing  in  heaven  above, 
or  on  the  earth .  beneath,  or  in  the  waters  under  the  earth," 
and  yet  the  Romish  Church,  which  claims  to  be  Holy  and 
Catholic,  commands  all  in  its  communion  to  bow  down  to 
images  of  saints,  and  of  Christ  and  the  Virgin  Mary ! 

The  allusions  to  the  cherubim  over  the  mercy  seat,  and 
the  brazen  serpent,  furnish  no  authority  whatever  for  the 
worship  which  Papists  ofier  to  their  idols.  The  cherubira 
were  placed  in  the  Holy  of  Holies,  which  was  accessible  to 
the  High  Priest  alone,  and  to  him  only  once  a  year.  The 
common  people  never  saw  them,  and  consequently  these 
images  could  not  have  been  made  for  the  purpose  of  receiv- 
ing Popish  dulia.  As  for  the  brazen  serpent,  if  we  turn  to 
2  Kings  xviii.  4,  we  shall  find  that  after  the  Israelites  had 
been  inveigled  into  the  idolatrous  practices  of  the  heathen, 


FIRST  AND  SECOND  COMMANDMENT.  33 

they  actually  did  bow  down  to  it  and  burnt  incense  to  it,  and 
for  this  reason  it  was  that  good  king  Hezekiah  "  brake  in 
pieces  the  brazen  serpent  which  Moses  had  made." 

The  subject  of  the  veneration  of  images  and  relics  is  dis- 
cussed at  length  in  my  Lectures  on  Romanism,  to  which  I 
beg  leave  to  refer  my  reader. 

The  exposition  of  the  third  commandment  (the  second  in 
Romish  catechisms)  contains  nothing  that  is  unscriptural. 

"  What  is' forbidden  in  this  command? 

Arts.  "  No  one,"  says  the  Roman  catechism,  "  may  des- 
pise the  divine  name,  no  one  may  take  it  in  vain,  nor  swear 
by  it,  either  falsely,  or  needlessly,  or  rashly." 

"  By  the  name  of  God  is  here  meant,  not  the  mere  word, 
signifying  God,  but  the  thing  signified  by  it,  that  is,  God 
himself,  or  the  Divine  majesty,  or  his  attributes. 

"  Whence,  observe  that  this  name,  although  it  be  placed  in 
the  singular,  yet  ought  to  be  understood  as  referring  to  all 
those  things  which  are  usually  attributed  to  God ;  thus  the 
Roman  catechism  (teaches.) 

"  Therefore  by  this  precept  perjury  is  forbidden :  also  every 
oath  imprudently  or  rashly  uttered,  sacrilege,  blasphemy, 
and  every  vain  assumption  of  the  Divine  name. 

"  What  does  this  second  precept  teach? 

"  The  Roman  catechism  replies  :  'that  the  name  of  God  is 
to  be  honoured,  and  that  by  it  we  may  swear  in  a  holy  man- 
ner.' The  name  of  God  is  honoured  and  praised  by  acts 
of  faith,  hope  and  charity,  and  by  good  works  of  every 
kind,  especially  by  the  public  confession  and  preaching  of 
the  Divine  name,  by  the  singing  of  Divine  praises,  and  by 
saying  as  well  in  adversity  as  in  prosperity  :  '  Blessed  be 
the  name  of  the  Lord  ;'  by  the  invocation  of  the  Divine 
name,  and  by  swearing  in  a  holy  manner." 

To  all  this  we  respond,  Amen. 


34  THE  THIRD  COMMANDMENT. 

CHAPTER  VII. 
[No.  79.— No.  87.] 

Concerning  the  Third  Commandment  of  the  Decalogue 
(i.  e.  the  Fourth.) 

After  alluding  to  the  reasons  of  the  change  from  the 
seventh  to  the  first  day  of  the  week,  the  following  questions 
are  proposed. 

"  What  is  taught  by  this  third  precept,  in  the  new  law  ? 
(i.e.  under  the  Gospel.) 

^^  Ans.  Principally  these  three  things;  1.  That  certain 
specified  days  are  to  be  kept  holy  :  2.  That  they  are  to  be 
kept  holy  by  external  divine  worship,  by  iieaking  mass,"  ? 
&c. :  "  3.  That  the  same  are  to  be  kept  holy  by  abstaining 
from  servile  labours." 

"  Which  days  are  those  that  are  appointed  to  be  kept 
holy? 

^'Ans.  In  the  first  place  are  the  Lord's  days,  chosen  in 
memory  of  the  glorious  resurrection  of  Christ,  and  for  the 
religious  remembrance  of  the  mercy  of  creation  and  redemp- 
tion by  Christ. 

"  2.  Festival  days  also  are  appointed,  which  have  been 
consecrated  to  religion  on  account  of  some  particular  mys- 
tery of  our  redemption,  or  which  have  been  devoted  to  the 
Holy  Virgin,  or  Apostles,  Martyrs  or  other  Saints. 

"  What  is  the  object  of  festival  days  ? 

"  Festival  days  like  the  Lord's  days  have  been  instituted 
chiefly  to  call  to  mind  the  mercies  of  God:  moreover,  that 
the  goodness  and  power  of  God  may  be  praised  in  the  vic- 
tory and  glory  of  the  Saints  ;  and  that  the  Saints  themselves 
may  be  duly  honoured  and  invoked  by  us,  that  we  may  be 
helped  by  the-ir  prayers  ;  and  that  we  may  imitate  the  exam- 
ples of  those  whose  merits  we  call  to  mind. 

"  Besides  that  the  institution  and  observance  of  festivals 
of  this  kind,  and  particularly  of  those  which  are  called  the 
birth-days  of  the  martyrs,  are  very  ancient,  is  evidently 
seen  from  ecclesiastical  histories,  and  from  S.  Aug.  Ambrose, 


THE  THIRD  CO?,IMANDMENT.  35 

Chrysostom,  and  others,  who  have  written  sermons  to  the 
people  concerning  them."    (No.  79.) 

Great  stress  is  laid  in  this  connexion  upon  the  duty  of 
hearing  Mass  on  holy  days.  It  is  not  quite  a  mortal  sin  to 
neglect  it,  but  it  is  a  very  grievous  offence.  Non-attendance 
at  Vespers  is  a  venial  sin.  "  When  it  can  conveniently  be 
done,"  it  is  the  duty  of  the  faithful  to  go  to  hear  preaching 
and- the  catechism,  but  this  obligation  is  not  binding  if  there 
is  merely  a  trifling  reason  for  absence. 

"  But  it  is  to  be  observed  that  whilst  some  will  have  it  that 
the  church  enjoins  nothing  on  the  Lord's  days  and  festivals 
except  hearing  Mass,  and  that  therefore  the  faithful  do  not 
sin  against  a  precept  of  the  church,  if  they  are  present  nei- 
ther at  preaching,  nor  at  vespers  ;  yet  they  admit  that  those 
sin  venially  against  the  divine  command  concerning  the  sanc- 
tification  of  the  Sabbath,  who  perform  no  act  of  religion  on 
those  days,  except  the  hearing  of  the  Mass." 

Moreover,  where  it  can  conveniently  he  done,  it  is  the 
duty  of  the  faithful  to  hear  Mass  and  preaching  in  their  own 
parish.  The  priest,  who  without  cause  continuously  neglects 
to  preach  for  several  months,  or  for  one  month,  sins  mor- 
tally according  to  Bonacina  —  and  the  Council  of  Trent 
rather  confirms  this  opinion. 

Acts  of  faith,  hope,  charity,  contrition,  &c.,  are  recom- 
mended as  highly  meritorious.    (No.  80.) 

The  faithful  are  forbidden  to  engage  on  the  Lord's  days 
and  on  festivals  in  judicial  processes,  accompanied  with  noise 
and  confusion,  merchandizing  and  servile  labours.  Judicial 
proceedings  on  the  Sabbath  or  festival  days,  such  as,  the 
summoning  of  a  party,  examination  of  witnesses,  formation 
of  a  procession,  judicial  oath,  sentence,  execution,  &c.,  are 
null  and  void.  But  acts  of  voluntary  jurisdiction,  which  are 
done  without  judicial  bustle,  are  not  void — as  v.  g.  dispensa- 
tion, absolution  from  censure,  election,  &c. 

By  merchandizing,  "  fairs  are  meant,  such  as  take  place, 
once  or  twice  a  year,  or  even  every  week  —  also  contracts 
of  buying  and  selling,  bartering  or  hiring,  &c.,  whether 
made  publicly  or  privately." 

But  yet  certain  things  are  usually  permitted  with  the  con- 
sent of  the  superiors ;  such  as  the  purchase  of  certain  small 
articles  of  daily  food,  as  salt,  pepper,  sugar,  &c.,  in  a  store 


36  THE  THIRD  COMMANDMENT. 

that  is  closed.  This,  however,  as  the  most  illustrious  Ho- 
vius  says,  for  necessity's  sake,  &c. 

For  this  reason.  Layman  and  Billuart  excuse  those,  who 
on  the  aforesaid  days  sell  clothes,  shoes  and  other  things  to 
farmers  and  servants,  who  cannot  provide  themselves  with 
such  necessaries  on  other  days.  So  Marchantius  for  a  simi- 
lar reason  excuses  those  who  settle  with  their  workmen  on 
the  Lord's  day.  The  more  scrupulous,  however,  by  his 
own  admission,  are  accustomed  to  do  this  on  the  preceding 
day. 

Servile  works  are  those  corporeal  labours  in  which  one 
man  serves  another ;  such  are  ploughing,  digging,  the  exer- 
cise of  mechanical  arts,  &;c.  They  differ  from  the  exercise 
of  liberal  arts  inasmuch  as  the  corporeal  efforts  of  the  latter 
are  principally  directed  to  the  exercise,  instruction,  or  delight 
of  the  mind ;  thus,  to  teach,  read,  study,  preach,  prepare  a 
sermon,  &c.,  are  not  servile  works,  neither  are  they  forbid- 
den on  a  festival  day. 

To  spin  and  sew  being  servile  labours  are  forbidden  on 
holy  days. 

Whether  painting  is  a  servile  labour  is  a  vexed  question. 
Medina  and  Layman  think  it  is  not,  and  that  it  is  therefore 
a  lawful  employment  for  the  Lord's  day.  Common  opinion, 
however,  is  against  their  decision.  But  when  mere  sketches 
are  made,  or  when  persons  exercise  themselves  in  painting 
for  the  sake  of  recreation  or  improvement,  it  is  thought  the 
practice  may  be  more  easily  connived  at. 

"  It  is  certain,  however,  that  to  dye  cloths,  colour  joists, 
whiten  walls,  &c.,  are  servile  works." 

Notaries  and  scriveners  who  consume  a  great  part  of  a 
festival  in  writing  on  secular  business,  such  as  transcribing 
deeds,  accounts,  processes,  &c.,  commit  sin. 

As  to  hunting  and  fishing,  unless  accompanied  with  great 
noise  or  fatigue,  they  are  lawful  recreations  on  the  Lord's 
day.  "  Many  (theologians)  suppose  that  it  is  not  unlawful 
to  fish  with  a  reed,  hook,  or  small  nets  for  the  purpose  of 
recreation ;  and  they  think  the  same  of  hunting  on  a  small 
scale." 

Gathering  fruit  from  gardens  or  trees  is  also  included 
among  servile  labours :  but  Marchantius  excuses  from  mor- 
tal sin  those  who  gather  wild  fruits,  such  as  nuts,  herbs  from 


THE  THIRD  COMiu'ANDMENT.  37 

the  meadows,  &c.,  even  for  purposes  of  gain,  at  least  on  the 
score  of  custom. 

Whether  barbers  may  keep  their  shops  open  or  not,  is  not 
quite  clear — but  the  decision  is  rather  against  the  practice, 
although  La  Croix  and  Tamburinus  apologize  for  it ;  the 
former  excusing  barbers  if  they  shave  labourers  and  such 
as  are  hindered  on  other  days,  or  if  they  shave  some  from 
apprehension  that  they  might  lose  their  custom.  Tambu- 
rinus excuses  them  on  the  score  of  custom  —  but  Sanchez 
replies  that  this  custom  has  always  been  disapproved. 

Sports  are  not  forbidden — but  are  distinctly  permitted,  nor 
is  it  any  objection  that  they  are  attended  with  fatigue,  as 
playing  at  ball,  &c.,  because  this  fatigue  is  undergone  for 
the  sake  of  mental  recreation,  and  for  rest  and  recreation 
from  servile  labours. 

Neither  is  it  forbidden  to  travel  on  a  holy  day,  either  on 
foot,  horseback,  or  in  a  ship,  &c.,  unless  the  journey  is  ne- 
cessarily attended  with  servile  labour,  such  as  carrying  mer- 
chandize or  other  burdens,  leading  beasts  heavily  laden,  &;c. 
But  in  lawful  journeys,  venial  sin  may  be  committed,  if  too 
much  time  is  spent  upon  them,  and  the  mind  is  prevented 
from  being  open  as  it  should  be  to  divine  things.  (No.  81.) 

Bonacina  and  Collet  consider  servile  labour  on  a  holy  day, 
protracted  to  one  hour,  as  sufficiently  grave  to  constitute 
mortal  sin.  Marchantius  requires  three  hours ;  but  La 
Croix  fixes  on  two  hours,  and  is  sustained  by  the  more  com- 
mon opinion.  It  is  thought,  however,  that  the  quality  of 
the  work  should  be  regarded,  so  that  if  the  work  is  very 
servile  it  will  require  less,  if  very  light,  greater  time  to  make 
it  a  mortal  offence.  (82) 

There  are  four  circumstances  which  may  render  servile 
'abour  on  such  days  excusable:  they  are,  1.  necessity,  2.  duty 
to  God  or  our  neighbour,  3.  custom,  4.  dispensation. 

Physicians  and  apothecaries  are  excusable  for  preparing 
medicines  for  the  sick. 

Servants  and  poor  waiting-girls  are  excusable  for  mending 
their  clothes,  if  they  have  no  time  on  other  days,  and  have 
no  one  who  can  give  them  to  other  persons  to  mend  for 
them.  But  their  masters  sin  in  not  giving  them  the  neces- 
sary leisure.     Cooks  are  excused  in  the  same  way  for  pre- 


38  THE  THIRD  COMMANDMENT. 

paring  articles  of  food  on  holy  days.  Others  acquit  them 
on  the  plea  of  custom,  even  when  they  prepare  delicacies. 

Those  who  make  funeral  clothes  on  a  holy  day  are 
usually  excused  on  the  score  of  necessity,  if  they  absolutely 
cannot  be  finished  on  another  day  —  so  also  blacksmiths 
shoeing  horses  for  the  convenience  of  travellers. 

Soldiers  are  excusable  for  any  acts  in  the  line  of  their 
profession  performed  on  holy  days. 

It  is  lawful  to  labour  in  a  servile  way  whenever  the  work, 
which  has  been  commenced,  cannot  be  discontinued  without 
loss,  as  in  the  manufacture  of  glass,  iron,  &c. 

So  too  it  is  lawful  to  labour  in  the  harvest  or  vintage, 
when  there  is  danger  of  damage  from  rain,  &c.  But  when 
this  extraordinary  labour  is  performed,  license  should  be 
obtained  from  the  bishop,  &c. 

Likewise,  if  persons  are  so  poor  that  they  cannot  afford 
to  lose  a  day,  they  may  labour  privately,  if  they  cannot 
otherwise  maintain  their  wives  and  families,  particularly  if 
several  festivals  concur,  and  they  have  not  otherwise  been 
negligent,  &lc.  ;  and  when  extraordinary  occasions  of  profit 
occur,  they  may,  according  to  Pontus  and  Billnach,  be  ex- 
cused for  improving  them. 

"  Finally,  observe  in  all  cases  that  nothing  be  done  con- 
trary to  law;  that  no  labour  be  deferred  to  a  holy  day, 
which  could  have  been  done  before,  and  that  more  is  never 
done  than  necessity  to  avoid  loss,  &c.  requires."   (83.) 

Servile  labour  performed  on  a  festival  is  not  necessarily  a 
mortal  sin,  as  it  may  be  merely  internal  and  accomplished 
in  a  very  short  time,  and  therefore  not  forbidden  by  the 
fourth  commandment.    (85.) 

Any  sin  which  is  in  itself  mortal  is  aggravated  by  the 
circumstance  of  its  being  committed  on  a  holy  day.   (86.) 

The  first  objectionable  feature  in  this  Romish  divinity 
which  painfully  afiects  a  Bible  Christian  is  the  insult  which 
is  offered  to  the  God  of  the  Sabbath,  by  making  festival- 
days,  appointed  by  the  Popish  church,  of  equal  authority 
with  the  Lord's  Day.  God  has  set  apart  one  day  out  of 
the  seven  for  himself — and  the  Romish  church  appoints 
we  know  not  how  many  more  for  herself ^  and  claims  for 


THE  THIRD  COMMANDMENT.  39 

them  the  sg,me  regard  which  is  due  to  the  Sabbath  of 
the  Lord  our  God.  This  is  arrogance,  which  is  peculiarly 
and  emphatically  Roman.  From  the  above  synopsis  of 
the  sections,  which  treat  of  the  observance  of  the  Sabbath, 

WE  MAY  INFER  THAT  THE  INCREASE  OF  SabBATH- 
BREAKING  IN  ANY  COUNTRY  WILL  BE  IN  EXACT  PROPOR- 
TION TO    THE    INFLUENCE  WHICH    PoPERY  ACQUIRES.       To 

this  fruitful  source  of  the  abominations  of  the  earth  we  may 
trace  all  the  glaring  violations  of  the  Lord's  day,  which  are 
most  commonly  practised  in  our  large  cities,  and  indeed 
throughout  our  whole  continent;  not  a  few  of  which  are 
tolerated  even  in  the  Christian  church.  Those  persons  who 
absent  themselves  from  the  church  on  the  afternoon  and 
evening  of  the  Lord's  day,  after  attending  in  the  morning, 
are  involuntarily  sanctioning  the  practice  of  Papists.  Indeed, 
the  deluded  Romanist,  who  conscientiously  attends  mass  on 
the  morning  of  the  Sabbath,  and  then  considers  himself  at 
liberty  to  "  find  his  own  pleasure"  during  the  rest  of  the  day, 
is  more  excusable  than  the  professed  Protestant,  who  with 
better  knowledge  deems  himself  at  liberty  to  spend  the  after- 
noon and  evening  of  the  Sabbath  in  amusement,  after  hav- 
ing paid  his  compliments  to  his  Maker  by  attending  the 
morning  service  in  some  house  of  worship. 

The  license  which  is  given  to  many  of  the  grosser  forms 
of  Sabbath-breaking  will  of  course  find  favour  with  the 
multitude,  who  are  lovers  of  pleasure  more  than  of  God ; 
but  it  will  be  well  for  those  who  are  in  the  communion  of 
the  Romish  church,  as  well  as  for  such  as  are  somewhat 
favourably  disposed  to  her  doctrines  and  ritual,  to  reflect 
that  Jehovah  will  not  sufl^er  his  day  to  be  polluted  with  im- 
punity, and  that  he  will  assuredly  judge  the  Babylonish 
woman  for  all  the  Sabbath-breaking  which  is  the  legitimate 
offspring  of  her  unscriptural  principles  ;  and  if  "  this  mark 
of  the  ])east"  be  found  on  any  one,  he  must  receive  of  the 
plagues,"  which  God  has  in  store  for  her. 


40  THE  THIRD  COMMANDMENT. 

What  can  be  more  explicit  than  the  language  oS  the  Fourth 
Commandment? — "  iTemember  the  Sabbath  day,  to  keep  it 
holy.  Six  days  shalt  thou  labour,  and  do  all  thy  work : 
But  the  seventh  day  is  the  Sabbath  of  the  Lord  thy  God :  in 
it  thou  shalt  not  do  any  work,  thou,  nor  thy  son,  nor  thy 
daughter,  thy  man-servant,  nor  thy  maid-servant,  nor  thy 
cattle,  nor  the  stranger  that  is  within  thy  gates  :  For  in  six 
days  the  Lord  made  heaven  and  earth,  the  sea,  and  all  that 
in  them  is,  and  rested  the  seventh  day :  wherefore  the  Lord 
blessed  the  Sabbath  day,  and  hallowed  it."  Exod.  xx.  8,  9, 
10,  11. 

How  can  we  reconcile  with  this  precept  the  license  offered 
in  the  Romish  church,  to  engage  in  trifling  pastimes  and  in 
sports,  such  as  fishing  and  hunting  on  the  Sabbath  day? 
"  Thou  shalt  do  no  manner  of  work !"  "  Ah  !"  the  Papist 
will  tell  you,  "  this  is  no  manner  of  worJc ;  it  is  recreation 
and  'pleasure.''''  But  what  saith  the  Scripture  ?  **  If  thou 
turn  away  thy  foot  from  the  Sabbath,  from  doing  thy  plea- 
sure on  my  holy  day ;  and  call  the  Sabbath  a  delight,  the 
holy  of  the  Lord,  honourable ;  and  shalt  honour  him,  not 
doing  thine  own  ways,  nor  finding  thine  own  pleasure,  nor 
speaking  thine  own  words :  Then  shalt  thou  delight  thyself 
in  the  Lord ;  and  I  will  cause  thee  to  ride  upon  the  high 
places  of  the  earth,  and  feed  thee  with  the  heritage  of  Jacol) 
thy  father:  for  the  mouth  of  the  Lord  hath  spoken  it." 
Isaiah  Iviii.  13,  14. 

Here  is  an  express  prohibition  of  such  recreation.  (See 
also  Jer.  xvii.  20,  27,  &c.)  We  are  no  sticklers  for  the 
Pharisaical  observance  of  the  first  day  of  the  week ;  we  ad- 
mit that  works  of  real  necessity  and  mercy  cannot  desecrate 
the  Lord's  day ;  for  it  always  has  been  and  ever  will  be 
"  lawful  to  do  good  on  the  Sabbath  day,"  but  it  is  impious 
to  speak  of  poor  mechanics  being  compelled  through  poverty 
or  any  other  cause  to  pursue  their  ordinary  calling  on  the 
Lord's  day.     The  poor  need  rest  as  much,  if  not  more  than 


THE  FOURTH  PRECEPT.       -  41 

the  rich  ;  if  you  deprive  them  of  their  Sabbath,  you  subject 
them  to  perpetual  drudgery ;  nothing  is  better  calculated 
to  soothe  their  distress  than  the  doctrines,  consolations  and 
prospects  of  the  Christian  religion.  Does  it  not  argue  an 
utter  absence  of  spirituality  to  insinuate  that  the  poor  man 
can  possibly  be  injured  by  a  due  observance  of  the  Lord's 
day  ?  Even  in  a  temporal  view,  we  believe  it  will  be  found 
that  in  the  end  nothing  can  be  gained  by  Sabbath-breaking. 
The  law  of  necessity  and  mercy  we  recognize  as  Scrip- 
tural, but  as  for  "  Custom"  and  "  Dispensation,"  which  con- 
stitute two  of  the  four  reasons  which  justify  servile  labour 
on  the  Sabbath,  we  cannot  acknowledge  them.  They  who 
plead  "  custom,"  will  do  well  to  remember  who  has  said — 
"  Broad  is  the  road  and  wide  is  the  gate  that  leadeth  to  de- 
struction, and  many  there  be  which  go  in  thereat ;  because 
strait  is  the  gate,  and  narrow  is  the  way  that  leadeth  unto 
life ;  and  few  there  be  that  find  it !"  And  as  for  "  Dispen- 
sations," we  have  no  faith  in  them.  We  believe  them  to  be 
devices  of  Satan,  and  as  such  we  scorn  and  abhor  them. 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

[No.  87.-94.] 

Concerning  the  Fourth  (j.  e.  the  Fifth)  Precept  of  the 

Decalogue. 

The  87th  Section  contains  some  excellent  and  unexcep- 
tionable advice,  relative  to  the  honour  which  is  due  from 
children  to  their  parents.  We  are  taught  that  love,  rever- 
ence, obedience  and  assistance  are  justly  to  be  expected  by 
parents  from  their  offspring ;  that  next  to  God  we  are  to 
love  father  and  mother,  and  manifest  our  affection  "  by 
wishing  for  them  the  greatest  benefits,  praying  for  their  bo- 
dily and  spiritual  health,  and  manifesting  this  love  by  visible 
tokens." 
4 


43  THE  FOURTH  PRECEPT. 

"  They  are  delinquent  in  this  duty  of  love,  who  hate  or 
despise  their  parents ;  who  rejoice  in  their  adversity,  or  de- 
plore their  prosperity,  or  who  wish  evil  to  them  ;  also  those 
who  distress  their  parents,  frown  upon  them,  speak  unkindly 
to  them,  &c." 

The  duty  of  filial  affection  is  illustrated  by  the  manner  in 
which  Joseph  honoured  his  father.  Gen.  xlvi.  29. — "Joseph 
made  ready  his  chariot  and  went  up  to  meet  Israel  his  father, 
to  Goshen,  and  presented  himself  unto  him ;  and  he  fell  on 
his  neck,  and  wept  on  his  neck  a  good  while."  And  again, 
by  a  reference  to  3  Kings,  ii.  19.,  {i.e.  to  1  Kings;  in  the 
Doway  Bible  the  Books  of  Samuel  are  called  I.  and  II. 
Kings,) — "  Bathsheba  therefore  went  unto  King  Solomon  to 
speak  unto  him  for  Adonijah.  And  the  king  rose  up  to  meet 
her,  and  bowed  himself  unto  her,  and  sat  down  on  his 
throne,  and  caused  a  seat  to  be  set  for  the  king's  mother, 
and  she  sat  on  his  right  hand." 

"  The  Roman  catechism  also  teaches  that  we  honour  our 
parents,  when  we  imitate  such  actions  and  manners  as  are 
commendable,  according  to  that  passage,  John  viii.  39 — '  If 
ye  are  Abraham's  spns,  do  Abraham's  works.'  " 

Towards  the  close  of  this  section,  however,  there  is  one 
dead  fly,  which  gives  the  box  of  ointment  a  taint  of  Popery. 
It  is  made  the  duty  of  pious  children  to  provide  a  prudent 
confessor  for  their  parents  in  the  article  of  death,  but  there 
is  no  Scripture  quoted  for  this,  as  m  the  preceding  cases. 
For  this  omission,  we  cannot  blame  Peter  Dens,  as  Moses 
and  all  the  prophets  and  apostles,  have  certainly  not  re- 
corded any  thing  about  the  matter  in  question. 

The  88th  Section  contains  some  sound  rules  relative  to 
the  obedience  due  to  parents,  mutilated,  however,  by  that 
unfortunate  propensity  of  distinguishing  between  mortal  and 
venial  sin. 

The  89th  No.  treats  of  the  claims  of  parents  upon  filial 
duty.  They  are  three,  viz.  —  1.  legitimate  birth;  2.  a  de- 
cent education  ;  3.  proper  instruction  in  the  rules  of  life  and 
in  morals. 

"  Under  the  third  head,  parents  are  obliged  to  see  to  it 


THE  FOURTH  PRECEPT.  43 

that  their  children  are  baptized  as  early  as  possible,  and  they 
ought  to  teach  them  the  first  rudiments  of  the  faith,  to  send 
them  to  catechism,  and  when  reason  has  developed  itself, 
use  their  endeavours  that  they  may  convert  themselves  to 
God ;  further,  by  precept  and  example  to  direct  them,  and 
by  reward  and  punishment  restrain  them  from  sins  :  con- 
cerning which,  however,  parents  are  to  be  admonished  that 
they  do  this  not  through  anger  and  too  many  blows,  but 
rather  by  withdrawing  from  them  their  food,  play,  and  other 
pleasures,"  &c. 

"  From  this  infer  that  parents  should  be  regularly  asked 
at  confession,  whether  they  have  children,  whether  they  in- 
struct them  properly,  whether  they  send  them  to  catechism 
and  to  school,  whether  they  do  not  permit  them  to  be  out  at 
night  and  to  keep  dangerous  company,  &c." 

The  claims  of  parents  to  due  regard  from  their  children 
are  sustained  by  several  quotations  from  the  Apocrypha. 
The  genuine  Scriptures  would  have  furnished  many  that  are 
more  to  the  purpose.  However,  we  will  not  be  captious,  for 
if  Papists  and  Protestants  follow  the  advice  addressed  from 
the  Apocrypha,  they  will  do  well  in  so  far  as  this  precept  is 
concerned.  Parents,  it  seems,  are  required  to  have  their 
children  baptized  as  early  as  possible  ,*  to  this  we  have  no 
objections,  provided  the  ceremony  be  performed  by  a  Chris- 
tian minister,  with  the  application  of  water  only,  in  the  name 
of  the  Holy  Trinity.  But  we  cannot  understand  why  it  is, 
if  children  are  regenerated  by  baptism,  (as  the  priests  be- 
lieve and  teach),  that  parents  must  use  their  endeavours  that 
these  regenerated  children  may  be  converted  when  they  at- 
tain to  years  of  discretion.  This  to  us  is  even  a  greater 
mystery  than  the  practical  benefit  to  soul  or  body  to  be  de- 
rived from  the  addition  of  oil,  salt,  or  spittle,  which  are 
some  of  the  elements  of  the  Popish  laver  of  regeneration. 

"  The  Roman  catechism  adds  a  fourth  general  reason  for 
honouring  parents  and  all  superiors,  viz. — that  in  them,  we 
honour  God,  because  all  power  and  superiority  is  from  God, 
and  God  wills  that  we  honour  superiors  as  representing  God ,- 


44  THE  FOURTH  PRECEPT. 

hence  the  apostle,  Eph.  vi.  5.  — '  Servants  be  obedient  to 
your  masters  according  to  the  flesh — as  to  Christ.  6.  Not 
with  eye-service,  as  men  pleasers ;  but  as  the  servants  of 
Christ,  doing  the  will  of  God  from  the  heart.  7.  With  good- 
will doing  service  as  to  the  Lord  and  not  to  men.' 

"  Spiritual  directors  properly  present  this  motive  to  obedi- 
ence, in  order  that  they  may  induce  children  and  others  who 
are  in  subjection  to  obey,  by  proposing  to  them,  whether  if 
God  himself  should  enjoin  anything,  they  would  not  cheer- 
fully fulfil  it,  but  that  when  a  command  of  a  superior  is 
obeyed,  God  accepts  it,  as  though  he  had  himself  enjoined  it." 

We  must  be  permitted  to  demur  here.  When  a  parent 
or  any  one  in  authority  enjoins  something  that  is  clearly  a 
duty,  then  from  the  above  Scripture,  it  is  evident  that  we  are 
bound  to  do  the  will  of  God  from  the  heart ;  but  the 
case  is  very  different  when  a  priest  dignifies  his  own  will, 
lust  or  passion  by  making  it  equivalent  to  the  will  of  God, 
as  priests  have  done  in  thousands  of  instances,  to  their  eter- 
nal infamy  !  There  are  circumstances  in  which  "  we  must 
obey  God  rather  than  men,"  as  Peter  Dens  properly  remarks 
in  a  previous  section,  (88)  but  even  there,  "  God  and  the 
church"  are  associated  as  though  of  equal  authority.  The 
following  is  the  paragraph  to  which  I  allude : 

"  Should  we  always  and  in  all  things  obey  our  parents? 

"  Ans.  No.  We  are  not  obliged  to  obey — 1.  When  a 
precept  of  a  higher  power  is  in  the  way ;  and  2.  When  in 
this  matter,  the  son  is  not  subject  to  his  parents :  and  thus 
the  son  is  not  obliged  to  obey,  if  they  enjoin  anything  against 
the  law  of  God  or  the  church,  or  which  is  in  any  way  sin- 
ful." 

"  Under  the  name  of  parents  are  included — 

"  1,  and  chiefly,  those  who  have  begotten  us  according  to 
the  flesh,  &c. 

"  2.  Ecclesiastical  and  spiritual  superiors,  as  the  Bishop, 
Pastor,  Confessor,  &c. — for  they  produce  and  promote  spi- 
ritual life  in  us;  hence  Paul,  1  Cor.  iv.  15. — 'I  have  begot- 
ten you  through  the  Gospel.' 

"  3.  Secular  superjors  are  also  meant,  as  the  king,  magis- 


THE  FOURTH  PRECEPT.  45 

trate,  masters,  &c.  Thus  the  servants  of  Naaman  called 
him  father.    (2  Kings,  v.  13.) 

"  4.  Those  are  meant  to  whose  care  we  have  been  com- 
mitted, such  are  tutors,  guardians,  masters,  &c.  Thus  Eli- 
sha  called  Elijah,  father.    (2  Kings,  ii.  12.) 

"5.  Aged  persons  also  come  under  the  name  of  parents, 
concerning  whom  it  is  said,  Lev.  xxix.  32.,  '  Thou  shalt  rise 
up  before  the  hoary  head,  and  honour  the  face  of  the  old 
man.' 

"  6.  All  these  persons  we  honour  by  the  abovenamed  acts, 
by  love,  reverence,  obedience  and  assistance ;  but  not  all 
equally,  but  according  to  the  order  of  superiority,  relation- 
ship and  subjection,  as  S.  Thomas  remarks,  &c. — 'The  in- 
ferior is  bound  to  obey  his  superior,  according  to  the  order 
of  superiority,  as  a  soldier  the  general  of  the  army,  in  such 
things  as  relate  to  war ;  the  servant  the  master,  in  those 
things  which  relate  to  the  performance  of  servile  works ; 
the  son  the  father,  in  those  things  which  pertain  to  discipline 
of  life,  and  domestic  concerns,  and  so  of  other  things.' " 

In  case  of  contracting  marriage,  children  are  not  obliged 
to  obey  their  father — but  they  ought  to  ask  the  counsel  and 
consent  of  their  parents. 

When  two  superiors  enjoin  things  which  are  incompatible, 
the  greater  is  to  be  obeyed ;  the  nature  of  the  injunction  is 
also  to  be  considered,  &c. 

What  is  to  be  done,  when  both  are  of  equal  authority  is  not 
stated,  and  we  leave  the  question  to  perplex  some  future  cas- 
uist.   (No.  90.) 

The  91st  Section  contains  a  short  dissertation  on  the  pro- 
mise appended  to  the  command  "  Honour  thy  father  and  thy 
mother — that  thy  days  may  he  long  in  the  land,  which  the 
Lord  thy  God  gineth  thee.''''  The  promise  is  correctly  in- 
terpreted as  including  eternal  life  as  well  as  a  long  and  hap- 
py existence  upon  earth  ;  the  dispensations  of  God's  provi- 
dence which  not  unfrequently  remove  good  men  in  early 
life,  are  shown  to  be  perfectly  consistent  with  this  promise. 
God  may  see  that  a  longer  life  would  not  be  good  for  them  ; 
or  they  may  be  taken  from  the  evil  to  come;  hence  when 
premature  death  overtakes  good  men,  grievous  calamities 
may  justly  be  apprehended.     The  promise  that  their  days 

shall  be  long  upon  the  earth  is  conditioned  bv  the  question 
4  *  '  * 


46  THE  FOURTH  PRECEPT. 

whether  long  life  upon  earth  would  be  to  their  advantage, 
and  at  all  events,  they  are  abundantly  compensated  by  on 
eternity  of  happiness  in  heaven.  "  He  cannot  be  said  to  be 
deceived  to  whom  gold  is  given,  when  silver  had  been  pro- 
mised." The  doctrine  of  this  section  is  Scriptural,  and  we 
sincerely  wish  we  could  endorse  every  chapter  in  Dens' 
Theology  as  cheerfully  as  we  can  this. 

The  Sections  92  and  93,  which  treat  of  the  remaining 
precepts  of  the  decalogue,  contain  nothing  of  special  interest, 
in  so  far  as  the  peculiar  dogmas  of  Popery  are  concerned. 
They  are  sound,  logical  and  Scriptural  expositions  of  the 
duties  enjoined  by  the  Great  Lawgiver  upon  all  men  ;  and 
there  is  not  a  moral  sentiment  in  them  which  may  not  be 
cordially  approved  by  every  true  Protestant.  It  is  not  ne- 
cessary to  insert  them,  as  they  may  be  found  in  substance 
in  almost  every  Protestant  catechism.  The  only  objection 
which  we  have  to  these  sections,  is  the  plea  for  the  division 
of  the  tenth  commandment;  this  is  rendered  necessary  by 
the  forced  union  of  the  first  and  second  precepts  of  the 
decalogue.  The  ninth  commandment  in  the  Romish  cate- 
chism is, 

"Thou  shalt  not  covet  thy  neighbour's  wife." 

"  What  is  forbidden  by  this? 

^^  Ans.  Every  secret  sin  against  chastity,  such  as  inclina- 
tion,  desire,  a  lingering  delight  ;*  for  that,  which  in  the  sixth 
commandment  (the  seventh)  is  forbidden  in  deed,  is  here  for- 
bidden in  desire. 

"  In  the  same  way,  the  tenth  commandment  corresponds 
to  the  seventh,  (the  eighth,)  and  the  things  which  are  there 
forbidden  in  deed,  are  here  forbidden  in  desire." 

The  tenth  commandment  then,  according  to  the  Romish 
catechism,  is  this,  *'  Thou  shalt  not  covet  thy  neighbour's 

*  I  have  translated  the  words  "  deleclatio  morosa,"  a  lingering  de- 
light, rather  than  a  morose  delight,  because  the  etymological  root  of 
the  adjective  is  "  mora,"  which  signifies  "  delay."  Tlie  nienning-  is, 
"  an  impure  delight  upon  which  the  mind  is  permitted  to  dwell."  The 
reader  will  please  regard  the  words  "lingering  delight"  as  a  technical 
term. 


THE  FOURTH  PRECEPT.  47 

house nor  his  man  servant,  nor  his  maid  servant,  nor 

his  ox,  nor  his  ass,  nor  anything  that  is  thy  neighbour's." 

The  plea  by  w^hich  this  presumptuous  interference  with 
the  order  and  arrangement  of  the  ten  commandments  is  jus- 
tified is  in  fact  this  : — The  ninth  precept,  "  Thou  shalt  not 
covet  thy  neighbour's  wife,"  is  the  counterpart  of  the  sixth, 
"  Thou  shalt  not  commit  adultery ;"  and  the  tenth  precept, 
*'  Thou  shalt  not  covet  thy  neighbour's  house,  nor  his  man 
servant,"  &c.,  is  the  counterpart  of  the  seventh,  "Thou  shalt 
not  steal ;"  the  sins  being  in  the  one  instance  forbidden  in 
deed^  and  in  the  other  in  desire, — hence  the  propriety  of  the 
division. 

Now  to  this  we  object — 

Because  it  is  an  ingenious  invention  of  the  Romish  church, 
as  is  very  evident  from  the  simple  fact  that  on  the  table  of 
stone,  the  words  "  thou  shalt  not  covet  thy  neighbour's  wife" 
FOLLOW  the  command  "  thou  shalt  not  covet  thy  neighbour's 
house,'*  (see  Exodus,  xx.  17.)  whereas  in  the  Romish  cate- 
chism the  order  is  inverted.  By  what  authority  are  the 
words,  which  Jehovah  wrote  with  his  own  finger  upon  the 
second  table  of  stone,  hewn  out  of  their  place,  and  made  to 
stand  in  an  order  different  from  that  which  he  had  assigned 
them?  Do  not  the  connexion  and  the  very  unity  of  the 
precept  require  that  they  should  be  left  just  as  he  placed 
them?  The  true  reason  of  this  violent  defacing  of  the  de- 
calogue we  have  already  stated. —  The  second,  command- 
ment  is  either  entirely  ornitted  or  else  mutilated  in  almost 
every  catechism  of  the  Romish  church  published  through- 
out the  world  !  Now  as  we  must  have  ten  commandments 
in  the  decalogue,  the  last  precept  is  hewn  into  two,  in  order 
that  the  complement  may  be  furnished,  and  that  the  fraudu- 
lent omission  of  the  precept  relative  to  "  graven  images," 
and  the  "  likenesses  of  any  thing,  whether  in  heaven  above 
or  in  the  earth  beneath,  or  in  the  waters  under  the  earth," 
may  be  covered  up,  and  thus  the  faithful  be  enabled  without 


48  CONCERNING   GRACE. 

conscientious  scruple  to  bow  down  to  all  the  idols,  which  the 
Babylonish  woman  sets  up  for  them  to  worship. 

This  "  dead  fly"  malies  our  apothecary'' s  box  of  ointment 
stink  again.  Whilst  we  commend  the  practical  duties,  which 
are  enforced  in  these  sections,  to  our  own  observance  and  to 
the  regard  of  our  brethren  of  every  persuasion,  we  must 
condemn  the  presumptuous  attempt  to  amend  the  handiwork 
of  Jehovah. 


CHAPTER  IX. 
Treatise  concerning  Grace, 

This  treatise  contains  much  that  would  very  generally  be 
considered  as  sound  theology,  not  a  little  that  involves  vexed 
questions,  together  with  some  theories  that  are  peculiar  to 
the  church  of  Rome. 

Grace  is  defined  to  be  "  a  supernatural  divine  benefit, 
given  gratuitously  to  an  intellectual  creature  in  order  to  eter- 
nal happiness."  Grace  thus  defined  is  distinguished  from 
natural  endowments,  such  as,  intellect,  will,  free  agency, 
life,  or  being,  feeling,  &c. 

It  is  distinct  also  from  spiritual  gifts,  such  as  the  gill  of 
tongues,  discerning  of  spirits,  healing  diseases,  prophecy, 
&c. — all  which  may  be  possessed  by  an  individual  and  he 
still  remain  unacceptable  to  God,  as  Paul  teaches,  1  Cor.  xiii. 
"  Though  I  speak  with  the  tongues  of  men  and  of  angels 
and  have  not  charity,  I  am  become  as  a  sounding  brass  or 
a  tinkling  cymbal,"  &c. 

Grace  is  divided  into  external  and  internal.  External 
grace  is  that  which  affects  a  man  only  outwardly,  as  the 
preaching  of  the  Gospel,  &c.  Internal  grace  affects  a  man 
inwardly. 

Internal  grace  is  divided  into  grace  conferred  gratuitously, 
and  grace  which  places  its  subject  in  a  gracious  or  accepta- 
ble state  before  God;  and  this  latter  species  of  internal  grace 
is  divided  into  habitual  and  actual  crace. 


CONCERNING  GRACE.  49 

"  Habitual  grace  is  divided  into  primary,  which  makes  the 
unrighteous  righteous.,  and  secondary,  which  is  an  increase 
of  grace  and  makes  the  righteous  more  righteous. 

"Actual  grace  is  divided  into,  1.  operating  and  co-operating  ; 
2.  into  preventing  and  subsequent ;  3.  into  exciting  and  as- 
sisting ;  4.  into  sufficient  and  efficacious ;  5.  into  grace  of 
the  understanding,  and  grace  of  the  will ;  6.  also  into  grace 
of  the  first  state,  or  state  of  innocence,  and  into  grace  of 
the  second  state,  or  state  of  lapsed  nature." 

My  readers  would  probably  not  wish  to  follow  me  through 
the  elaborate  treatises  on  these  various  subdivisions,  and  I 
shall  therefore  merely  note  a  few  of  the  most  striking  sec- 
tions, after  giving  an  outline  of  the  general  doctrine. 

"  Habitual  grace  is  a  supernatural  gift  imparted  by  God, 
which,  permanently  cleaving  to  the  soul  by  way  of  habit, 
renders  it  formally  acceptable  to  God ;  and  by  this  a  man 
is  said  to  become  a  partaker  of  the  Divine  nature." 

"  Actual  grace  is  a  certain  divine,  supernatural,  transient 
assistance,  exciting  (us)  to  learn,  will  or  do  things  conducing 
to  salvation. 

"  Actual  grace  is  absolutely  necessary  to  the  performance 
of  every  work  conducing  to  salvation.  This  truth  is  opposed 
to  Pelagius,  who  denied  the  necessity  of  grace,  &c. 

"  It  is  proved  by  2  Cor.  iii.  5. — '  We  are  not  sufficient  of 
ourselves  to  think  any  thing  as  of  ourselves  :  but  our  suffi- 
ciency is  of  God.'  And  again,  Philip,  ii.  13. — 'It  is  God, 
who  worketh  in  you  both  to  will  and  to  do  ,*'  and  John,  xv. 
5.,  Christ  says — '  Without  me  ye  can  do  nothing.' 

"  It  is  proved  by  reason  :  supernatural  order  exceeds  na- 
tural power ;  therefore  for  a  work  of  supernatural  order, 
powers  exceeding  natural  strength  are  required,  that  is,  pro- 
portionate, supernatural  aid,  or  grace. 

"  Besides  it  is  impossible  for  a  human  being  to  do  a  good 
natural  work  without  the  natural  concurrence  of  God  :  there- 
fore, a  man  cannot  do  a  supernatural  work  without  super- 
natural help,  or  actual  grace;  as  no  act  may  exceed  the 
proportion  of  its  active  principle. 

"  What  works  are  called  salutary  1  (i.  e.  conducing  to 
salvation.) 


50  CONCERNING  GRACE. 

"  Three  kinds  of  works  are  to  be  noted  here,  viz.,  works 
deserving  of  eternal  life^  of  which,  hereafter;  works  only 
morally  good,  of  which,  in  the  following  No.,  and  salutary 
works. 

"But  those  works  are  called  salutary,  which  in  some 
mode  conduce  to  eternal  happiness  or  justification ;  v.  g., 
works  of  faith,  of  hope,  and  of  charity,  fasting,  alms,  (fee, 
if  they  be  ordained  to  a  supernatural  end ;  and  these  are 
things,  which  ought  to  proceed  from  actual  grace,  in  order 
that  they  may  be  called  salutary,  &c. 

*'  Whence  observe,  a  sinner  before  habitual  grace  may  on 
the  whole  possess  actual  graces,  and  thus  be  able  v.  g.  to 
elicit  acts  of  faith,  of  hope,  of  imperfect  contrition,  &c." 
(No.  4.) 

We  cannot  lay  too  much  stress  upon  the  absolute  neces- 
sity of  the  grace  of  God  to  qualify  us  for  the  performance 
of  any  action  that  shall  be  good  in  his  sight.  No  man  in  a 
state  of  nature  can  be  subject  to  the  law  of  God,  because 
the  carnal  mind  is  enmity  against  God,  and  this  repugnance 
can  be  overcome  only  by  grace,  working  in  us  effectually  to 
will  and  to  do  the  good  pleasure  of  God.  Grace  effects 
this  not  by  giving  them  new  faculties  but  by  rectifying  those 
which  we  already  possess.  It  changes  the  bias  of  the  will, 
enlightens  the  understanding,  quickens  the  conscience,  and 
enlivens  the  affections,  drawing  them  out  afler  God  and  holi- 
ness. As  for  works  which  in  any  way  conduce  meritori- 
ously to  our  acceptance,  we  do  not  believe  that  grace  has 
anything  to  do  with  them. 

"  What  works  are  called  morally  good  ? 

"  Ans.  Those  which  are  done  according  to  the  dictate  of 
right  reason  through  the  natural  powers  only,  with  the  gen- 
eral concurrence  of  God,  without  the  aid  of  supernatural 
grace. 

"  These  works  are  intermediate  between  such  as  conduce 
to  salvation  and  sinful  works :  to  say  that  they  are  such  as 
conduce  to  salvation,  is  Pelasjian ;  and  to  say  that  they  are 
sinful,  is  Bajus'  error; — of  this  kind  are,  to  give  alms  from 
the  natural  affection  of  pity,  to  love  parents  and  friends,  to 


CONCERNING  GRACE.  51 

restore  that  which  belongs  to  another,  &c.,  merely  on  ac- 
count of  the  natural  honesty  and  rectitude  of  reason. 

"  Can  a  man  do  a  good  work  without  grace  ? 

"1.  It  has  been  said  in  the  preceding  No.  that  without 
actual  grace  a  man  can  not  do  a  work  conducing  to  his  sal- 
vation. 

"  2.  Man,  even  in  this  state  of  lapsed  nature,  may  with- 
out grace  do  some  works  (which  are)  only  morally  good : 
the  reason  is,  because  man  though  he  be  injured  through 
sin,  is  still  not  deprived  of  all  natural  good  :  besides,  as 
these  works  are  of  a  natural  order,  they  do  not  exceed  the 
powers  of  nature. 

"  3.  This  conclusion  is  contrary  to  Bajus,  Jansenius, 
Quesnel,  &c. 

"  4.  Jansenius  has  followed  Bajus,  Bk.  3.  concerning  the 
state  of  lapsed  nature ;  also  Quesnel,  whose  38th  proposi- 
tion, which  was  condemned,  is  this :  '  Without  the  grace  of 
him  who  makes  free,  the  sinner  is  free  only  to  commit  evil.' 

"  ObJ.  I.  John,  XV.  5.,  Christ  says :  *  Without  me  ye  can 
do  nothing  ;'  therefore,  not  even  a  work  morally  good  with- 
out grace. 

"  Ans.  I  deny  the  inference  :  for  the  sense  is,  that  with- 
out the  grace  of  Christ,  we  can  not  do  any  work  conducing 
to  salvation  :  for  Christ  is  speaking  of  those  works,  through 
which  we  abide  in  him  and  bring  forth  fruit ;  that  is,  con- 
cerning meritorious  works,  not  such  as  are  only  morally 
good. 

"  Other  passages  which  are  objected  are  understood  gene- 
rally, so  that  without  Christ  as  God,  that  is,  without  the 
general  concurrence  of  God,  we  can  do  nothing,  not  even 
works  morally  good,"  &c.    (No.  5.) 

The  objections  which  follow  are  quotations  from  an  oecu- 
menical council  and  from  Augustine :  these  we  shall  not  no- 
tice. 

A  mind  that  is  imbued  with  Scriptural  truth  will  perceive 
the  workings  of  the  Mystery  of  iniquity  in  the  doctrines  stated 
in  the  above  extracts.  We  are  far  removed  from  the  Pela- 
gian view,  that  works  "only  morally  good"  can  conduce  to 
salvation ;  and  just  as  far  do  we  pray  ever  to  be  kept  from 
the  Popish  doctrine  that  any  works  are  of  themselves  me- 


63  CONCERNING  GRACE. 

ritorious.  But  we  believe  that  poor  Bajus,  who  is  condemn- 
ed under  fearful  anathemas,  had  "  the  secret  of  the  Lord" 
with  him,  notwithstanding  the  Pope's  bull  of  excommunica- 
tion. With  him,  we  hold  that  the  so  called  "  morally  good" 
works  of  carnal  men  are  and  must  be  sinful ;  and  for  these 
reasons : — 

Because  God  looks  at  the  heart,  and  "  as  a  man  thinketh 
in  his  heart  so  is  he."  God  always  takes  into  view  the  mo- 
tive in  which  an  action  originates,  when  he  judges  of  its 
character.  Now,  as  the  motives  of  the  carnal  mind  are  ne- 
cessarily selfish,  every  action  proceeding  from  them  must  be 
corrupt,  on  the  principle  that  "  a  corrupt  tree  cannot  bring 
forth  good  fruit."  "  Who  can  bring  a  clean  thing  out  of  an 
unclean  ?  Not  one."  We  admit  that  actions  "  morally  good" 
in  common  estimation  may  be  performed  by  the  natural 
man,  but  that  such  actions  are  good  in  the  sight  of  God,  or 
that  they  are  not  sinful,  we  believe  to  be  unscriptural.  "  The 
sacrifice  of  the  wicked  is  an  abomination  to  the  Lord :  but 
the  prayer  of  the  upright  is  his  delight."  Prov.  xv.  8.  The 
unregenerate  man  walks  in  his  own  counsel,  and  makes  self 
his  idol ;  now  though  he  may  do  some  actions  which  are 
apparently  praiseworthy  apart  from  the  originating  motive, 
he  cannot  in  his  unrenewed  state  do  anything  that  is  pleasing 
to  God,  because  he  seeks  his  own  interest  exclusively,  and 
not  the  glory  of  God.  Whether  the  Christian  eats  or  drinks, 
or  whatever  he  does,  he  does  all  to  the  glory  of  God.  He 
walks  by  faith  and  not  by  siglit.  The  unregenerate  man 
walks  by  sight  only ;  but  "  without  faith  it  is  impossible  to 
please  God."  Prayer  according  to  Romish  doctrine  is  a 
meritorious  work,  and  the  mere  utterance  of  certain  petitions 
to  the  Virgin  Mary,  &c.,  is  made  to  hide  a  multitude  of  sins  ; 
but  miserably  are  those  poor  creatures  deceived,  who  ima- 
gine that  God  hears  with  complacency  the  "  vain  repeti- 
tions," which  are  the  offspring  either  of  superstition  or  slav- 
ish fear.  So  far  from  purchasing  salvation  in  any  measure 
or  degree,  they  are  an  abomination  in  the  sight  of  God. 


CONCERNING  GRACE.  53 

Whilst  we  maintain  that  no  man  can  perform  an  action 
that  is  really  "morally  good"  without  the  aid  of  divine  grace, 
and  whilst  we  contend  that  every  thing  which  is  done  by  the 
unregenerate  man  is  tainted  with  siriy  and  is  therefore  sinful, 
we  must  not  be  understood  as  saying,  nor  can  we  suffer  the 
inference  to  be  drawn  from  our  premises,  that  it  is  wrong  for 
an  unconverted  man  to  clothe  the  naked,  feed  the  hungry, 
&c.  &c.,  or  perform  any  other  so  called  "morally  good" 
action.  Far  from  it.  But  it  is  wrong  for  him  to  do  these 
things  from  a  selfish  motive ;  and  so  long  as  the  actuating 
principle  is  corrupt,  he  cannot  please  God  by  any  thing  that 
he  does,  however  specious.  Yet  if  all  men  will  not  be  reli- 
gious, would  to  God  that  they  would  all  be  moral ! 

I  should  be  very  loth  to  affirm,  that  the  temperance  move- 
ment among  Romanists  in  Ireland  and  in^this  country  has 
done  no  good.  I  bless  God  for  every  drunkard  that  has 
been  reclaimed  through  its  agency,  and  I  rejoice  that  order 
and  sobriety  have,  to  so  wide  an  extent,  superseded  confusion 
and  intemperance.  But  as  I  believe  that  "a  corrupt  tree 
cannot  bring  forth  good  fruit,"  I  am  confirmed  in  my  suspi- 
cion that  the  glory  of  God  has  not  been  the  motive  in  which 
this  moral  reformation  has  originated.  Hence,  until  the  true 
motive  be  revealed,  I  cannot  call  it  absolutely  good. 

I  do  not  wish  to  appear  uncharitable,  much  less  to  be 
such,  but  I  shall  be  most  agreeably  disappointed  if  a  very 
short  time  will  not  suffice  to  convince  many  who  differ  from 
me  now,  that  the  Romish  temperance  movement  is  neither 
more  nor  less  than  a  political  mancsuvre !  A  temperance 
medal  will  answer  quite  as  good  a  purpose  as  a  red  cross  on 
the  shoulder,  or  any  other  mark  by  which  the  faithful  have 
been  designated  in  years  gone  by. 

As  to  the  condemned  proposition  of  Quesnel,  that  "  with- 
out the  grace  of  him  who  makes  free,  the  sinner  is  free  only 
to  commit  sin,"  there  ]s  a  sense  in  which  I  believe  it  can  be 
successfully  ma.ntamed.  We  all  agree  that  the  sinner  is 
5  ' 


64  CONCERNING  GRACE. 

the  slave  of  sin,  —  his  understanding,  his  conscience,  and, 
above  all,  his  will,  are  under  the  bondage  of  Satan ;  how, 
then,  can  he  be  said  strictly  to  be  free  ?  If  he  is  led  cap- 
tive by  the  devil  at  his  will,  he  is  to  all  intents  and  purposes 
despoiled  of  his  liberty,  and  free  only  to  commit  sin :  this 
does  not  affect  his  accountability,  because  he  has  voluntarily 
chosen  the  yoke  of  Satan  ;  he  hugs  his  chains,  and  prefers 
the  pleasures  of  sin  and  the  service  of  the  devil  to  the  glori- 
ous liberty  of  the  children  of  God.  And  until  the  grace  of 
the  Son,  who  maketh  free  indeed,  changes  the  bent  of  his 
will,  it  is  morally  impossible  that  his  spiritual  fetters  should 
be  broken,  and  that  he  should  follow  holiness,  without  which 
no  man  can  see  the  Lord.  We  disown  the  abstract  propo- 
sition that  any  man  is  under  any  other  necessity  of  sinning 
than  that  which  his  own  imperious  lusts  and  sinful  passions 
impose  upon  him ;  and  this  necessity,  so  far  from  being  an 
excuse,  is  the  very  thing  which  gives  the  killing  emphasis  to 
his  guilt. 

The  necessity  of  grace  in  order  to  love  God,  to  know  the 
truth  and  to  fulfil  the  law,  is  taught  in  the  sixth  and  seventh 
sections.  Man  may  learn  natural  truths  without  grace ;  he 
may  arrive  at  the  knowledge  of  the  existence  of  God  by  his 
natural  powers  alone ;  thus  Paul  says  the  Gentile  philoso- 
phers are  inexcusable,  "  because  that  when  they  knew  God, 
they  glorified  him  not  as  God." 

"  Yet  man  in  this  state  cannot,  without  the  special  aid  of 
grace,  understand  all  natural  truths  collectively  taken  on 
account  of  the  weakness  of  his  understanding  and  various 
other  hindrances. 

"  Man  cannot  understand  by  true  and  sufficient  assent  the 
supernatural  truths  of  faith,  without  supernatural  grace :  the 
reason  is,  because  these  truths  exceed  the  natural  power  of 
the  human  understanding ;  therefore  there  is  need  of  aid  ex- 
ceeding nature  in  order  to  understand  them  by  sufficient 
assent ;  and  hence  the  apostle  says,  1  Cor.  xii.  3 — '  No  one 
can  say  that  Jesus  is  Lord,  except  by  the  Holy  Ghost.' " 

The  next  paragraph  justly  affirms  t:iat  any  one  may  learn 
these  supernatural  truths,  and  afford  a  mere  human  assent 


CONCERNING  GRACE.  55 

of  opinion,  without  grace,  such  as  heretics  bestow  upon  cer- 
tain arguments  accommodated  to  human  understanding. 

It  is  an  article  of  faith  that  no  man  can  obey  any  super- 
natural precept  without  grace.  (No.  7.)  Also,  that  the  com- 
mands of  God  are  possible. 

*'  It  has  before  been  said,  that  certain  precepts  cannot  be 
observed  by  the  powers  of  nature  alone,  which  yet  may  be 
fulfilled  through  grace ;  and  thus  it  must  simply  be  said  that 
no  precepts  of  God  are  impossible  to  be  observed."   (No.  8.) 

Grace  is  necessary  to  enable  us  to  recover  from  sins,  and 
to  overcome  temptations ;  but  man  in  his  lapsed  state  may 
overcome  light  temptations  without  grace,  by  the  mere  exer- 
cise of  his  will.  His  inability  to  overcome  temptations  of 
long  standing,  and  then  only  by  effort  continued  through  a 
long  period,  &c.,  is  to  be  ascribed  not  to  any  want  of  free 
will,  but  to  its  instability  and  weakness,  and  the  difficulty  of 
these  things;  and  hence  the  inability  is  not  physical,  but 
moral.   (No.  9.) 

Grace  is  necessary  to  enable  us  to  avoid  mortal  sins.  A 
sinner  may  escape  single  but  not  all  mortal  sins  in  a  long 
time.  "  The  sin  which  is  not  quickly  blotted  out  by  pen- 
ance, by  its  own  weight  draws  down  to  another." 

"  Every  one  who  sins  mortally,  is  bound  under  pain  of 
mortal  sin  to  confess;"  "because,  otherwise,  he  exposes 
himself  to  the  danger  of  falling  into  other  mortal  sins,  &c." 

"But  observe  with  Sylvius,  that  the  danger  is  not  so 
pressing  with  respect  to  a  penitent  sinner,  although  he  may 
prepare  himself  for  confession  through  one  or  two  weeks, 
because  he  has  in  a  certain  way  been  already  converted  to 
God  in  so  far  as  his  desire  is  concerned." 

A  just  man  may  avoid  all  and  every  mortal  sin,  even  dur- 
ing the  longest  period,  &c.    (No.  10.) 

"  A  man  in  a  state  of  lapsed  nature  may  avoid  single  ve- 
nial sins  by  the  ordinary  assistance  of  grace ;  but  yet,  though 
he  be  a  righteous  man,  he  cannot  avoid  all  for  any  conside- 
rable time,  except  by  special  privilege."   (No.  11.) 

"  The  principal  efficient  cause,  as  well  of  actual  as  ha- 
bitual grace,  is  God  alone. 

"  The  secondary  or  instrumental  efficient  cause,  are  the 
human  nature  of  Christ,  and  the  sacraments  of  the  church.. 


56  CONCERNING  GRACE. 

"  The  ministerial  cause  are  angels  and  men :  angels  by 
supplying  directions  by  which  we  may  attain  to  grace;  but 
men  not  only  by  praying  and  instructing,  but  also  by  admi- 
nistering the  sacraments. 

"  The  final  cause  is  the  glory  of  God  and  Christ,  and  our 
salvation. 

"  The  meritorious  cause  is  Christ,  or  the  merits  of  Christ, 
that  is  in  the  state  of  fallen  nature :  for  in  this  state  no  grace 
is  given,  except  on  account  of  the  merits  of  Christ's  passion  ; 
so  that  we  neither  have  nor  perform  any  thing  conducing  to 
our  salvation,  which  does  not  proceed  from  the  grace  given 
by  the  merits  of  Christ. 

"  The  prayers  and  merits  of  holy  men  may  be  a  merito- 
rious cause,  but  subordinate  to  the  merits  of  Christ,  because 
they  are  united  to  his :  in  this  way  a  just  man,  by  works 
done  through  grace,  may  worthily  merit  for  himself  an  in- 
crease of  grace,  and  properly  (merit)  primary  grace  for  an- 
other. 

"  The  grace  of  angels,  and  of  the  first  man  in  a  state  of 
innocence,  does  not  proceed  from  the  merits  of  Christ ;  for 
Christ  died  only  for  the  fallen  human  race."   (No.  13.) 

To  my  mind  there  seems  to  be  a  palpable  contradiction  in 
the  assertion,  that  the  prayers  and  works  of  holy  men  may 
worthily  merit  grace.  What  is  grace  but  undeserved  fa- 
vour?  And  how  can  this  be  merited?  Surely  there  never 
was  a  bolder  attempt  to  mar  the  grace  of  God,  and  make  it 
of  none  effect,  than  this  device  of  Satan  to  persuade  men  that 
they  can  by  their  prayers  and  works  merit  that,  which  from 
its  very  nature  can  be  imparted  only  as  a  free  gift.  As  for 
the  general  doctrine  of  merit,  we  shall  have  occasion  to  com- 
pare that  with  "  the  law  and  the  testimony"  in  a  subsequent 
chanter,  and  we  therefore  dismiss  it  for  the  present. 


CONCERNING  JUSTIFICATION.  57 

CHAPTER   X. 
Freatise  concerning  Justification. 

Justification  is  defined  to  be  "  A  translation  from  a 
state  of  sin  to  a  state  of  habitual  grace  and  adoption  of  the 
sons  of  God  through  Jesus  Christ  our  Saviour. 

**  This  definition  is  derived  from  the  Epist.  to  the  Coloss. 
i.  13,  *  Who  hath  delivered  us  from  the  power  of  darkness, 
and  translated  us  into  the  kingdom  of  his  dear  Son.'  Also, 
Council  of  Trent,  sess.  6,  ch.  4,  where  it  says,  that  justifica- 
tion is  a  translation  from  that  state  in  which  man  is  born  the 
son  of  the  first  Adam,  into  the  state  of  the  grace  and  adop- 
tion of  the  sons  of  God.  The  Council  of  Trent  treats  of  the 
primary  justification  by  which  any  one  constituted  in  origi- 
nal sin,  is  justified." 

The  increase  of  sanctifying  grace  is  wont  also  to  be  called 
justification,  according  to  that  passage  of  Rev.  xxii.  11  — 
"  He  that  is  righteous,  let  him  be  righteous  still."  But  jus- 
tification thus  taken  is  called  secondary  in  relation  to  the 
former. 

"  The  word  righteous  is  not  here  taken  for  a  particular 
cardinal  virtue,  but  for  a  combination  of  virtues :  and  hence 
it  may  be  defined  as  being  the  right  disposition  of  the  whole 
man  towards  God,  his  neighbour,  and  himself. 

"  What  are  the  principal  errors  of  our  heretics  in  this 
matter? 

"  Ans.  1 .  They  teach  that  in  justification  sins  are  not. 
truly  remitted,  but  only  covered  by  the  justice  of  Christ,  as 
Jacob  was  covered  with  the  garment  of  Esau. 

"  2.  That  justification  is  not  eflected  through  habitual 
grace  dwelling  in  the  soul,  but  through  the  alone  righteous- 
ness of  Christ  imputed  to  us. 

"  3.  That  in  order  to  righteousness  no  other  disposition 
than  faith  alone  is  required. 

"S.  Thomas  refiated  these  errors  long  before  they  arose, 
God  so  disposing  (him)."    (No.  26.) 

"  Prove  that  in  justification  sins  are  truly  remitted  and 
blotted  out.. 

"  Ans.  1.  It  is  proved,  first  from  Ps.  1.  2,  *  Blot  out  mine 
5* 


58  CONCERNING  JUSTIFICATION. 

iniquity;"  Egh.  i.  14,  *That  we  should  be  holy  and  without 
blame  before  him.'  Also,  1  John  i.  7,  '  The  blood  of  Jesus 
Christ  cleanseth  us  from  all  sin.' 

"  2.  It  is  proved  by  reason  ;  because,  otherwise,  it  would 
follow  that  a  man  was  righteous  and  unrighteous  at  the  same 
time:  because  it  is  supposed  that  he  is  justified,  and  that  the 
pollution  of  sin  remains  besides. 

"  3.  Finally,  this  was  settled  by  the  Council  of  Trent, 
sess.  5,  can.  5 — '  If  any  one  denies  that  the  guilt  of  original 
sin  is  remitted  through  the  grace  of  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord, 
which  is  conferred  in  baptism ;  or  even  asserts  that  that  is 
not  altogether  removed,  which  has  the  true  and  proper  na- 
ture of  sin  ;  but  says  that  it  is  only  erased  or  not  imputed  ; 
let  him  be  accursed.' " 

"Oft/./.  It  is  said,  Ps.  eS21,  'Blessed  are  they  whose 
transgressions  are  forgiven,  and  whose  sins  are  covered ;' 
and  V.  2,  *  Blessed  is  the  man  to  whom  the  Lord  does  not 
impute  sin  :'  therefore  sins  in  justification  are  not  blotted  out, 
but  are  only  covered,  and  are  not  imputed. 

*'  Ans.  I  deny  the  inference ;  for,  sins  to  be  covered  before 
God  is  the  same  as  to  be  blotted  out  and  destroyed :  because 
*all  things  are  naked  and  open  to  his  eyes,'  Heb.  iv.  13; 
therefore  in  order  that  our  sins  may  be  covered  before  God, 
it  is  necessary  that  they  in  no  manner  exist. 

"  In  the  second  verse,  he  is  called  blessed,  who  has  com- 
mitted nothing  which  could  be  imputed  to  himself  as  sin :  or 
if  the  Psalmist  treats  of  him  who  has  sinned,  God  is  then 
said  not  to  impute  sin  by  remitting  it. 

"  ObJ.  11.  Rom.  xiii.  14,  it  is  said,  '  Put  ye  on  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ ;'  therefore,  &c. 

"  Ans.  I  deny  the  inference :  for  to  put  on  is  here  spoken 
of,  because  justification  is  conferred  outwardly  through  the 
application  of  the  Holy  Spirit  by  way  of  ornament  to  ihe 
soul ;  and  this  is  not  effected  by  a  mere  external  imputation, 
but  by  an  internal  change,  by  casting  away  the  works  of 
darkness,  putting  off  the  old  man,  &c. 
'     "  When  is  God  said  to  remit  mortal  sin  ? 

"  Ans.  When  he  wipes  off  and  blots  out  the  stain  of  this 
sin  from  the  mind  of  the  person  who  has  sinned. 

"  Through  what  is  the  stain  of  mortal  sin  blotted  out  1 


CONCERNING  JUSTIFICATION.  59 

"  Ans.  Through  sanctifying  grace,  which  is  imparted  by 
God. 

"  Can  mortal  sin  be  consistent  at  the  same  time  in  the 
same  subject  with  sanctifying  grace?  Also,  can  mortal  sin 
be  remitted  without  the  application  of  sanctifying  grace? 

"  Some  suppose  that  this  may  be  done  by  the  absolute 
power  of  God  :  but  it  is  useless  to  ask  this ;  because  it  is  cer- 
tain, according  to  the  present  divine  order,  that  sanctifying 
grace  is  not  consistent  with  mortal  sin,  neither  can  this  be 
remitted  without  the  application  of  that  grace.  This  is  plain 
from  the  condemnation  of  the  31st,  32d,  33d  and  71st  of  the 
propositions  of  Bajus.    (No.  27.) 

"•  Imputed  Righteousness  is  repugnant  to  Holy  Scripture^ 

"  Prove  against  the  heretics,  that  justification  is  formally 
effected  through  the  application  of  habitual  grace  dwelling  in 
the  soul ;  but  not  through  the  righteousness  of  Christ  out- 
wardly imputed  to  us. 

"  1.  Ans.  It  is  proved  from  Rom.  v.  5,  *  The  love  of  God  is 
shed  abroad  in  our  hearts  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  who  is  given 
to  us  ;'  concerning  which  St.  Aug.  Bk.  concerning  the  Spirit 
and  the  Letter,  chap.  23,  says :  '  The  love  of  God  is  said  to 
be  shed  abroad  in  our  hearts,  not  that  (love)  by  which  he 
himself  loves  us,  but  (that)  by  which  he  makes  us  lovers  of 
himself;  just  as  that  was  called  the  righteousness  of  God,.by 
the  gift  of  which  we  are  rendered  righteous.' 

"Hence  the  Coun.  of  Trent,  sess.6.  can.  11.  decreed  against 
the  heretics,  '  If  any  one  shall  say  that  men  are  justified 
either  by  the  mere  imputation  of  the  righteousness  of  Christ, 
or  by  the  sole  remission  of  sins,  that  grace  and  love  being 
excluded  which  is  shed  abroad  in  their  hearts  by  the  Holy 
Spirit  and  remaining  in  them ;  or  also  (who  shall  say)  that 
the  grace  by  which  we  are  justified  is  only  the  favour  of 
God,  let  him  be  accursed.' 

"  Ohj.  I.  It  is  said  1  Cor.  i.  30 — Christ,  *  who  is  made 
to  us  of  God  wisdom,  and  righteousness,  and  sanctification, 
and  redemption ;'  therefore  we  are  formally  declared  right- 
eous through  the  righteousness  of  Christ. 

"  Ans.  I  deny  the  inference :  because  these  and  similar 
(passages)  where  Christ  is  called  our  peace,  life,  salvation, 
resurrection,  &c.,  ought  to  be  received  in  a  causal  not  a 


60  CONCERNING  JUSTIFICATION. 

formal  sense :  for  it  is  only  meant,  that  Christ  is  the  merito- 
rious cause  of  our  justification,  &c.  This  is  plain,  because 
when  Christ  is  said  to  be  our  wisdom,  it  is  evident  that  man 
is  not  formally  wise  with  the  wisdom  of  Christ,  but  with 
the  wisdom  pecuJiar  to  himself. 

"  Conclude  that  to  the  justification  of  every  sinner  these 
two  things  are  required,  1.,  the  application  of  divine  grace, 
and  2.  the  remission  of  all  mortal  sins:  which  is  effected  in 
little  children  through  Baptism,  without  any  previous  dispo- 
sition :  not  so  in  adults."    (No.  28.) 

"  What  is  required  for  the  justification  of  a  sinner? 

"  Ans.  For  infants  before  the  use  of  reason,  and  for 
those  who  have  been  idiots  perpetually,  no  disposition  is  re- 
quired for  justification,  as  they  are  justified  certainly  through 
the  Baptism  of  water,  or  of  blood. 

"  For  the  justification  of  an  adult  through  Baptism,  the 
Council  of  Trent,  Sess.  6.  chap.  6.  requires  a  disposition 
through  seven  degrees  or  impulses  of  the  soul. 

"The  first  is  the  impulse  of  divine  grace,  by  which  the 
sinner  is  excited  and  assisted,  according  to  Jer.  xxxi.  19., 

*  after  thou  didst  convert  me,  I  did  penance.' 

"  The  second  is  an  act  of  faith,  *  because  he  that  cometh 
to  God  must  believe.'   Heb.  xi.  6. 

"  The  third  is  an  impulse  of  fear,  useful  certainly,  yet 
not  necessary,  by  which  the  sinner  understanding  through 
faith  that  he  is  guilty  of  eternal  damnation,  endeavours  to 
put  away  his  sins ;  according  to  that  passage  Eccle.  i.  27. 

*  The  fear  of  the  Lord  driveth  out  sin.' 

"  The  fourth :  because  also  through  faith,  the  sinner 
considers  the  sovereign  mercy  of  God,  and  the  infinite  merits 
of  Christ,  hence  he  is  elevated  into  hope,  trusting  that  God 
will  be  propitious  to  him;  according  to  that  passage.  Matt. 
ix,  2.,  '  Be  of  good  heart :  thy  sins  are  forgiven  thee.' 

"  The  fifth :  after  hope  follows  the  incipient  love  of 
God,  as  the  fountain  of  all  righteousness;  for  when  the  sin- 
ner considers  the  distinguished  goodness  of  God,  that  he  is 
willing  to  forgive  sins  even  to  the  unworthy,  he  begins  to 
love  God  before  all  things  (else) ;  this  act  is  denoted,  Joel  ii. 
12. — '  Be  converted  to  me  with  all  your  heart.' 

"  The  sixth  act  is  hatred  and  detestation  of  sin,  or 
an  act  of  contrition ;  for  he  who  loves  God  as  the  fountain 


CONCERNING  JUSTIFICATION.  6i 

of  all  righteousness,  cannot  but  detest  sin  :  this  act  is  ex- 
pressed, Acts  ii.  38.  — '  Do  penance.' 

"The  seventh  is  the  purpose  of  receiving  the  sacra- 
ment, of  beginning  a  new  life,  and  keeping  the  divine  com- 
mandments, according  to  that  passage  of  Ezek.  xviii.  31. — 

*  Make  to  yourselves  a  new  heart  and  a  new  spirit,"  &c.,  &c. 
(No.  29.) 

"  Concerning  the  justifying  and  special  Faith  of  Heretics." 

"  What  does  faith  do  towards  justification  1 

"  I.  I  answer  with  Council  of  Trent,  Sess.  6.  can.  8. — 

*  Faith  is  the  beginning  of  man's  salvation,  the  foundation 
and  root  of  all  justification  ;  without  which  it  is  impossible 
to  please  God.' 

*'  Does  faith  alone  justify  ? 

"  II.  Ans.  Thus  Simon  Magus  asserted,  against  whom  St. 
James  says,  chap.  ii.  24. — '  By  works  a  man  is  justified,  and 
not  by  faith  only.' 

"  The  negative  answer  is  proved  also  by  1  Cor.  xiii.  2. — 

*  If  I  should  have  all  faith — but  have  not  charity,  I  am  no- 
thing ;'  and  from  1  John,  iii.  14. — 'He  that  loveth  not  abideth 
in  death.'  Hence,  the  Council  of  Trent  decreed,  Sess.  6.  can. 
9. — « If  any  one  shall  say,  that  a  wicked  man  is  justified  by 
faith  alone — let  him  be  accursed.' 

"  The  Lutherans  and  Calvinists  revived  this  heresy  under 
another  explanation,  distinguishing  a  threefold  faith  :  — 

"  III.  1.  Historical  faith,  by  which  we  believe  all  those 
things  to  be  true  which  are  contained  in  the  Holy  Scriptures. 

"  2.  The  faith  of  miracles,  by  which  miracles  were  per- 
formed :  through  which  we  implicitly  believe,  that  there  is 
nothing  which  cannot  be  done  by  God. 

"  3.  The  third  they  call  the  faith  of  promises^  by  which 
the  divine  promises  concerning  salvation  and  the  remission 
of  sins  are  believed.  This  they  subdivide  into  general,  by 
which  is  believed  that  God  has  promised  to  a-ll  believers,  sal- 
vation and  the  remission  of  sins  ;  and  into  special,  by  which 
every  man  in  particular  believes,  or  rather  confidently  trusts, 
that  his  sins  have  been  remitted  for  the  sake  of  the  merits 
of  Christ. 

"  IV.  The  heretics  affirm  that  this  special  faith  so  justifies, 
that  every  one  who  believes,  or  confidently  trusts  that  he  is 


62  CONCERNING  JUSTIFICATION. 

absolved  from  his  sins,  and  that  the  righteousness  of  Cljrist 
is  imputed  to  him,  is  by  that  very  act  (eo  ipso)  righteous. 

**  V.  This  empty  and  fictitious  faith  the  Council  of  Trent 
condemned,  Sess.  6.  chap.  9.  and  can.  12,  13,  and  14. 

"  VI.  It  is  refuted  also  by  the  Holy  Scripture,  in  which 
this  rash  faith  is  nowhere  found ;  but  that  faith  by  which  we 
believe  that  those  things  are  true  which  have  been  divinely 
revealed,  and  to  which  works  are  joined — thus,  Gal.  v.  6,  it 
is  said — '  Faith  which  works  by  love — avails.' 

*'  Obj.  I.  It  is  said.  Acts  xiii.  39.  — '  In  him  every  one 
who  believes  is  justified.'     Therefore,  &c. — 

"  Ans.  There  the  question  is  not  concerning  special  faith, 
but  concerning  faith  in  Christ ;  but  justification  is  ascribed 
to  faith,  not  as  if  it  were  alone  sufficient,  but  because  it  is 
necessary,  and  (is)  the  foundation  of  justification. 

"  VII.  Observe,  generally,  that  the  Holy  Scriptures  at- 
tribute one  and  the  same  thing  sometimes  to  one  cause  as 
the  only  one,  sometimes  to  another  ;  and  this  mode  of  speak- 
ing is  frequent.  Thus,  it  is  said,  Luke  xi.  41. — *  Give  alms, 
and  behold  all  things  are  clean  unto  you.'  Rom.  viii.  24. — 
*  We  are  saved  by  hope ;'  and  1  John,  iv.  7. — '  Every  one 
who  loves  is  born  of  God.'  In  which  places,  although  no- 
thing is  said  about  faith,  yet  it  is  still  certain  that  that  dispo- 
sition is  still  necessarily  required  for  the  remission  of  sins: 
and  hence  you  may  rightly  understand  similar  modes  of 
speech  under  this  condition.  If  other  requisites  are  present ; 
or  in  a  negative  sense :  if  faith  is  not  present,  if  alms  are 
not  given,  if  hope  is  not  present,  justification  cannot  be  ef- 
fected. 

"  ObJ.  11.  The  apostle  says,  Rom.  iii.  28. — *  We  account 
a  man  to  be  justified  by  faith  without  the  works  of  the  law.* 
Therefore,  &c. — 

"  J.W5.  I  deny  the  inference :  because  only  legal  works  of  the 
old  law  are  excluded,  and  works  done  by  the  powers  of  na- 
ture alone;  not  works  of  charity,  penance,  &c.  Therefore, 
the  opposition  is  made  not  of  faith  against  the  works  of  the 
new  law,  as  heretics  pretend,  but  of  the  new  law  against  the 
old  law,  and  the  law  of  nature. — (No.  30.) 

*'  Concerning  assurance  of  the  state  of  grace  and  faith.'''' 
"Can  a   man  certainly  know  that  he  has  sanctifying 
grace  1 


CONCERNING  JUSTIFICATION.  63 

*'  I.  Ans.  Without  special  revelation,  no  one  can  know 
with  the  assurance  of  faith  that  he  has  sanctifying  grace. 
This  was  settled  in  Council  of  Trent,  sess.  6.  ch.  9,  against 
our  heretics,  who  pretend  that  all  can  and  ought  with  divine 
faith  to  believe  that  they  are  righteous  ;  and  that  otherwise, 
they  are  neither  righteous  nor  believers. 

II.  Yet  by  special  revelation  a  man  can  know  certainly 
that  he  is  in  (a  state  of)  grace.  Thus,  the  Divine  Virgin 
knew  this  when  it  was  said  to  her  by  the  angel — '  Hail !  full 
of  grace.'  The  paralytic.  Matt.  ix.  2.—*  Be  of  good  heart. 
Son,  thy  sins  are  forgiven  thee ;'  and  the  woman  who  was  a 
sinner,  Luke  vii.  47. — '  Many  sins  are  forgiven  her  because 
she  loved  much  ;'  knew  that  their  sins  were  remitted  to  them. 
Concerning  St.  Paul,  it  is  disputed  whether  his  justification 
and  predestination  were  revealed  to  him. 

"  A  man  cannot  even  know  from  special  revelation,  with 
absolute  moral  certainty,  which  excludes  all  fear,  that  he  is 
in  sanctifying  grace  :  because  we  cannot  know  any  thing 
certainly  unless  it  is  evident,  or  rests  upon  infallible  author- 
ity— but  there  is  room  for  neither  in  this  case. 

"  The  Holy  Scripture  frequently  asserts  this  very  thing : 
as  Eccles.  ix.  1. — '  Man  knoweth  not  whether  he  be  worthy 
of  love  or  hatred.'  1  Cor.  iv.  4.  — '  I  am  not  conscious  to 
myself  of  anything ;  yet  in  this  I  am  not  justified ;'  and 
Phil.  ii.  12.  —  'Work  your  salvation  with  fear  and  trem- 
bling.' 

"Oft/.  /.  Rom.  viii.  16,  it  is  said:  *The  Spirit  himself 
giVeth  testimony  with  our  spirit,  that  we  are  the  sons  of 
God ;'  therefore,  we  can  most  certainly  know  that  we  are  in 
grace. 

"Ans.  /.  With  St.  Chrysostom  I  deny  the  inference :  be- 
cause that  testimony  is  not  concerning  a  particular  person, 
but  concerning  the  assembly  of  the  faithful,  or  concerning 
the  church :  that  the  church  is  doubtless  the  assembly  of  the 
sons  of  God,  but  not  that  this  or  that  person  is  the  son  of 
God  through  love. 

"  2.  The  Holy  Spirit  gives  a  certain  testimony  to  every 
righteous  man  that  he  is  the  son  of  God,  which  testimony 
in  itself  is  most  sure,  but  is  not  known  for  sure  by  the 
righteous  man  :  because  it  is  perceived  only  by  signs,  which 
make  only  a  probable  conjecture.     Hence,  we  are  forbidden 


64  CONCERNING  JUSTIFICATION. 

to  manifest  too  much  confidence:  for,  Eccles.  viii.  14,  it  is 
said, — '  There  are  wicked  men,  who  are  as  secure  as  though 
they  had  the  deeds  of  the  just.' 

'•'■Ohj.  II.  It  is  said,  1  John,  iii.  14.  — *  We  know  that  we 
have  passed  from  death  to  Ufe,'  &c. — 

^^Ans.  I  deny  the  inference ;  for  this  sentence  is  manifestly 
general,  signifying  that  they  had  been  translated  from  death 
to  life  who  love  the  brethren ;  but  John  trusted  that  himself 
and  others  were  of  that  number. 

"  IV.  Yet  authors  generally  maintain,  that  a  man  may 
have  some  moral  or  conjectural  assurance  of  his  own  ac- 
ceptance ;  which,  though  it  may  not  exclude  all  fear,  yet 
takes  away  the  discomposure  and  anxiety  of  mind,  accord- 
ing to  that,  1  John,  iii.  21.^'  If  our  heart  do  not  reprehend 
us,  we  have  confidence  toward  God.' 

"  May  a  man  be  certain  that  he  has  faith  ? 

"  V.  Ans.  Sylvius  thinks  that  a  believing  man  can  be  al- 
together sure  that  he  believes  or  assents  to  the  things  reveal- 
ed by  God :  because  the  church  sometimes  enjoins  that  the 
faithful  swear  that  they  believe  the  mysteries  of  faith.  Be- 
sides, faith  is  in  the  understanding ;  but  the  understanding 
can  be  sure  of  its.  own  assent,  as  a  faculty  may  perceive  and 
reflect  beyond  itself.  Add  to  this,  that  faith  has  a  certain 
and  infallible  external  rule,  viz. :  the  creed  of  the  church. 

"  Yet  Herincx  and  others  maintain,  that  a  believer  can 
have  no  more  than  a  moral  certainty ;  because,  although  the 
understanding  may  certainly  know  that  it  firmly  believes :  yet 
it  cannot  so  certainly  know  whether  it  believes  with  super- 
natural and  divine  faith ;  because  supernatural  does  not  fall 
under  notice.  The  creed  of  the  church  renders,  indeed,  be- 
lievers certain  concerning  the  object  which  they  believe, 
namely,  that  it  has  been  revealed  by  God ;  but  it  does  not 
render  them  certain  concerning  the  act  itself  of  believing 
whether  it  be  truly  supernatural ;  and  hence  it  may  be  pro- 
perly said,  that  the  oath  which  the  church  sometimes  requires, 
is  not  concerning  the  supernaturality,  but  only  concerning 
the  act  of  faith  in  itself. 

"  Whether  any  one  may  be  sure  that  he  has  the  habit  of 
faith  or  hope,  is  not  clear  as  yet.  That  no  one  can  be  sure 
of  his  own  predestination  or  election  to  glory,  we  have  said 
ia  the  treatise  concerning  God." 


CONCERNING  JUSTIFICATION.  65     . 

I  have  given  the  views  of  the  Romish  theologian  at  length, 
because  the  doctrine  which  is  involved  in  this  section  has 
justly  been  called  "  doctrina  stantis  aut  cadentis  Ecclesice." 
It  is  in  fact  the  key-stone  in  the  noble  arch  of  divine  revela- 
tion :  take  away  from  any  theological  system  the  great  truth 
that  7ce  are  Justified  freely  through  faith  only  for  the 
sake  of  Chrisfs  merits^  and  the  whole  fabric  tumbles  at 
once  into  a  chaotic  heap  of  rubbish !  Men  may  prop  up 
the  ruins  by  all  the  scholastic  lore  that  has  been  accumulat- 
ing for  ages,  and  they  may  seek  to  cement  them  by  the 
"  unanimous  consent  of  the  Fathers,"  but  this  daubing  with 
untempered  mortar  will  not  keep  one  stone  upon  another, 
when  the  salvation  of  a  single  soul  is  made  to  rest  upon 
this  foundation.  "  Other  foundation  can  no  man  lay  than 
that  is  laid,  which  is  Christ  Jesus."  This  corner  stone  is 
broad  enough  and  deep  enough  to  sustain  the  hope  of 
every  sinner,  even  though  all  men  should  build  upon  it 
alone.  We  want  not  the  subordinate  merits  of  the  Saints — 
for  even  the  holiest  of  men  always  have  been  saved  and 
ever  will  be  saved  by  grace.  And  if  they  confessed  that 
they  were  sinners,  justly  condemned  and  ruined,  if  they  fled 
for  refuge  to  Christ,  and  plunged  into  the  fountain  opened 
for  sin  and  uncleanness,  acknowledging  that  their  righteous- 
nesses were  filthy  rags,  and  that  the  blood  of  Christ  alone 
cleanseth  from  all  sin,  how  can  their  merits  assist  the  sin- 
ner ?  If  Naaman  had  told  the  prophet  that  he  would  con- 
sent to  wash  in  Jordan  frst,  on  condition  that  he  might 
complete  his  ablutions  in  Abama  and  Pharpar,  think  you 
that  Elijah  would  have  said,  "  Go  and  be  clean  ?"  No.  Be- 
cause the  Lord  God  was  putting  the  faith  of  the  proud  Syrian 
to  the  test,  whether  he  would  prefer  the  river  of  Israel  to  all 
the  streams  of  Damascus.  And  now  that  he  has  "  opened 
a  fountain  in  the  House  of  David,"  shall  sinners  wash  in 
that  Jirstj  and  then  go  and  bathe  in  the  merits  of  the  Saints? 
What  are  the  merits  of  God's  Saints  ?  When  they  came  to 
6 

'    f^'  ^ 


66  CONCERNING  JUSTIFICATION. 

Christ,  before  ever  they  could  wash  and  be  clean,  did  they 
not  all  with  one  mouth  confess  that  death  and  hell  were 
their  only  merits  1  From  these  merits  they  prayed  to  be 
delivered — and  if  the  sinner  will  wash  in  them^  what  is  this, 
but  to  cast  himself  into  the  waves  of  eternal  death,  and 
bathe  his  soul  in  the  burning  lake  1 

Is  not  the  righteousness  of  Christ,  "  the  white  raiment" 
in  which  the  saints  are  clothed  ]  But  how  did  they  get  this 
shining  apparel?  Was  it  not  by  confessing  with  shame, 
"  All  our  righteousnesses  are  as  filthy  rags,"  and  then  look- 
ing to  the  finished  righteousness  of  the  Lamb  of  God  ?  And 
shall  the  sinner  go  to  Christ  Jirsty  and  buy  of  him  without 
money  and  without  price,  the  white  raiment  offered  in  the 
Gospel,  and  then  clothe  himself  in  the  merits  of  the  saints, 
those  "  filthy  rags,"  which  with  tears  of  shame  they  have 
cast  off  for  ever  1  Satan  well  knows  that  some  minds  would 
be  startled  were  he  boldly  to  suggest  that  the  blood  of  Christ 
is  utterly  inefficacious  for  the  sinner's  redemption,  and  there- 
fore he  craftily  seeks  to  make  that  blood  of  none  effect,  by 
adding  to  it,  the  Tnerits  of  the  saints. 

Among  the  principal  errors  of  the  *'  heretics,"  the  first 
which  is  mentioned  is,  that  "  they  teach  that  in  justification, 
sins  are  not  truly  remitted,  but  only  covered  by  the  justice 
of  Christ,  as  Jacob  was  covered  with  the  garment  of  Esau." 

In  the  Word  of  God,  the  phrases  "  transgressions  are  for- 
given," and  "  sins  are  covered,"  are  used  as  parallel  and 
equivalent  terms,  and  they  are  so  used  by  the  Reformed 
churches  generally.  We  all  teach  the  same  thing  in  mat- 
ters essential  to  salvation;  and  in  relation  to  the  sinner's 
justification  before  God,  with  united  voice  Protestant  Chris- 
tendom proclaims  in  the  words  which  the  Holy  Ghost  teaches, 
"Being  justified  by  faith  we  have  peace  with  God  through 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ."   (Rom.  v.  1.) 

We  do  truly  teach  "that  justification  is  not  effected 
through  habitual  grace  dwelling  in  the  soul,  but  through  the 


CONCERNING  JUSTIFICATION.  C7 

alone  righteousness  of  Christ  imputed  to  us ;"  whilst  we  also 
declare  "  By  grace  are  ye  saved  through  faith,  and  that  not 
of  yourselves,  it  is  the  gift  of  God.  Not  of  works,  lest  any 
man  should  boast."  (Eph.  ii.  8,  9.)  The  third  error,  which 
is  imputed  to  us  "  heretics,"  is,  "  that  in  order  to  righteous- 
ness no  other  disposition  than  faith  alone  is  required."  We 
should  like  to  see  the  Protestant  Confession  of  Faith  in  which 
these  words  occur  precisely  as  they  are  here  presented. 
Protestants  are  not  wont  to  represent  saving  faith  as  existing 
alone  in  the  heart  of  a  regenerate  man.  They  would  tell 
all  who  ask  them  that  the  faith  which  links  them  to  the  Sa- 
viour "  works  by  love,"  and  that  "  love  is  the  fulfilling  of 
the  law."  We  are  no  advocates  of  Antinomianism.  We  do 
not  believe  that  the  faith,  which  consists  in  a  mere  specula- 
tive assent  to  the  doctrines  of  the  gospel,  will  unite  its  pos- 
sessor to  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  We  have  no  confidence  in 
the  religion  which  consists  in  cold,  inert  opinions,  and  we 
seek  no  fellowship  with  any  who  deny  that  "  faith  without 
works  is  dead  !"  But  we  do  exclude  our  own  works  and  the 
works  of  all  the  saints  in  heaven  and  on  earth,  from  all  share 
in  our  justification  before  God.  We  trust  alone  to  the  merits 
of  that  Saviour,  "  whom  God  has  set  forth  to  be  a  propitia- 
tion through  faith  in  his  blood;"  and  to  our  brethren,  who 
boast  of  the  merit  of  their  saints  and  of  their  own  good  works, 
we  say,  "  God  forbid  that  we  should  glory  save  in  the  cross 
of  Christ,  by  whom  the  world  is  crucified  unto  us,  and  we 
unto  the  world !" 

But  the  Council  of  Trent  has  settled  the  matter.  We  heed 
the  decisions  and  the  anathemas  of  the  doctors  and  bishops 
of  that  far-famed  council  just  as  much  as  the  fluttering  of  an 
army  of  bats  !  They  could  not  endure  the  light,  but  with  all 
their  ravings  and  their  curses  they  were  not  able  to  put  out 
the  candle  of  the  Lord  !  It  burned  in  spite  of  them,  and'  it 
will  go  on  kindling  into  the  blaze  of  the  noonday  sun,  until 
"  the  righteousness  which  is  through  faith  in  Christ,"  "  shall 


68  CONCERNING  JUSTIFICATION. 

go  forth  as  brightness,  and  the  salvation  thereof  as  a  lamp 
that  burneth."  It  will  burn  and  shine  until  the  Gentiles  shall 
hasten  to  its  light,  and  send  back  the  shout  of  the  redeemed 
in  glory,  "  unto  him  that  loved  us,  and  washed  us  from  our 
sins  in  his  own  blood,  and  hath  made  us  kings  and  pries-ts 
unto  God  and  his  Father ;  to  him  be  glory  and  dominion  for 
ever  and  ever.     Amen  !" 

But  "  imputed  righteousness  is  repugnant  to  Holy  Scrip- 
ture." Where  is  the  proof?  "  It  is  proved  from  Rom.  v.  5, 
*  The  love  of  God  is  shed  abroad  in  our  hearts  by  the  Holy 
Ghost,  who  is  given  to  us.' "  A  precious  text,  truly ;  but 
how  does  this  prove  that  imputed  righteousness  is  repugnant 
to  Holy  Scripture  1  Read  St.  Augustine's  Comnrient  on  this 
text.  But  St.  Augustine's  Comment  is  not  Holy  Scripture. 
Give  us  chapter  and  verse,  if  you  please,  to  sustain  the  truth 
of  the  caption  to  this  28th  section,  "  Imputed  righteous- 
ness   IS  REPUGNANT   TO  HoLY  ScRIPTURE."      ShoW  US    the 

passage  which  says,  in  so  many  words,  or  which  shuts  us 
up  to  the  inference,  that  "  the  righteousness  of  Christ  is  not 
imputed  to  the  believer."  That  "  the  love  of  God  is  shed 
abroad  in  the  hearts  of  the  children  of  God  by  the  Holy 
Ghost  given  to  them,"  we  believe ;  but  this  surely  does  not 
affect  the  doctrine  of  "  imputed  righteousness." 

Yes,  but  the  Council  of  Trent  has  decreed  (sess.  6,  can. 
21)  against  the  heretics,  "  If  any  one  shall  say  that  men  are 
justified  either  by  the  mere  imputation  of  the  righteousness 
of  Christ,  &c.,  let  him  be  accursed." 

But,  we  ask  for  Scripture,  not  i^oY  anathemas.  And  when 
we  come  on  such  an  errand  to  Holy  Mother,  and  beg  for 
bread,  she  ought  not  to  give  us  a  stone  !  If  we  are  "  here- 
tics," yet  she  claims  to  be  the  mother  of  us  all,  and  though 
undutiful  children,  yet  we  are  children  still ;  and  now  if  Holy 
Mother  will  show  us  the  Scripture,  which  plainly  and  with- 
out possibility  of  misapprehension  teaches  that  the  doctrine 
of  imputed  righteousness  is  false,  we  will  do  penance  on 


CONCERNING  JUSTIFICATION.  69 

the  spot,  and  seek  reconciliation  without  delay  !  Do  give  us 
Scripture,  according  to  promise. 

Well  then,  "  the  heretics  object  that  this  Scripture  '  Christ, 
who  is  made  to  us  of  God,  wisdom,  and  righteousness,  and 
sanctification,  and  redemption,"  teaches  that  we  are  formally- 
declared  righteous  through  the  righteousness  of  Christ.  Now 
we  deny  that  the  heretics — 

But  where  is  the  passage  to  prove  that  "  Imputed  right- 
eousness is  repugnant  to  Holy  Scripture  V  We  do  not  ask 
you  to  cavil  at  the  proof  texts,  which  we  advance  to  sustain 
our  side  of  the  question,  but  to  produce  such  as  will  une- 
quivocally sustain  your  position. 

"  Conclude  that  to  the  justification  of  every  sinner  these 
two  things  are  required  :  1st.  The  application  of  divine  grace, 
and  2d.  The  remission  of  all  mortal  sins,"  &c. 

But  where  is  the  Scripture  ? 

Holy  Mother  is  silent.  She  gives  us  no  texts  to  prove  that 
"  Imputed  righteousness  is  contrary  to  Holy  Scripture."  She 
gives  us  neither  bread,  nor  a  Jish,  nor  an  egg,  but  offers  us 
serpents,  and  scorpions,  and  stones,  in  their  place.  We 
cannot  digest  such  food. 

But  let  us  endeavour  to  overcome  evil  with  good ;  and 
since  no  Scripture  has  been  produced  to  disprove  the  doc- 
trine of  imputation,  let  us  see  if  the  word  of  God  will  not 
furnish  us  with  this  "  armour  of  righteousness  on  the  right- 
hand  and  on  the  left."  And  first,  we  will  state  what  we 
hold  to  be  the  Bible  doctrine  on  this  subject. 

We  believe  that  a  man  becomes  righteous  before  God  only 
by  a  true  faith  in  Jesus  Christ.  His  conscience  may  tell  him 
that  he  has  grievously  transgressed,  and  that  he  is  therefore 
justly  condemned  ;  he  may  know  and  feel  that  he  has  always 
come  short  of  the  glory  of  God,  and  that  the  corruptions  of 
his  heart  are  daily  causing  him  to  sin  ;  and  yet  he  is  righteous 
before  God,  because  without  any  merit  of  his  own,  but  only 
of  undeserved  grace,  the  perfect  satisfaction,  righteousness, 
6* 


7t)  CONCERNING  JUSTIFICATION. 

and  holiness  of  Christ,  are  grEfnted  and  imputed  to  him  ;  so 
that  the  believer  stands  before  God  as  though  he  had  never 
known  or  committed  sin ;  and  as  though  he  had  himself  fully 
accomplished  all  the  obedience,  vi'hich  Christ  his  great  Surety 
and  Substitute  has  accomplished  -for  him.  His  standing  is 
not  in  himself,  but  in  Christ.  He  is  accepted  in  the  Beloved. 
There  is  nothing  in  the  act  of  faith  itself  which  worthily 
merits  the  divine  favour ;  but  the  sinner  is  said  to  be  justified 
by  faith,  because  it  is  through  faith  alone  that  the  satisfac- 
tion, righteousness,  and  holiness  of  Christ,  can  be  received 
and  applied  by  the  believer. 

"  But  now  the  righteousness  of  God  without  the  law  is 
manifested.  Even  the  righteousness  of  God,  which  is  by 
faith  of  Jesus  Christ  unto  all  and  upon  all  them  that  believe, 
&c."    Rom.  iii.  21,  22,  &c. 

*'  Knowing  that  a  man  is  not  justified  by  the  works  of  the 
law,  but  by  the  faith  of  Jesus  Christ,  even  we  have  believed 
in  Jesus  Christ,  that  we  might  be  justified  by  the  faith  of 
Christ,  and  not  by  the  works  of  the  law,  for  by  the  works 
of  the  law  shall  no  flesh  be  justified."  Gal.  ii.  16.  See  also 
Eph.  ii.  8,  9 ;  Titus  iii.  5. 

"  If  Abraham  were  justified  by  works,  he  hath  whereof  to 
glory,  but  not  before  God.  For  what  saith  the  Scripture  ? 
Abraham  believed  God,  and  it  was  counted  to  him  for  right- 
eousness. Now  to  him  that  worketh  is  the  reward  reckoned 
not  of  grace,  but  of  debt.  But  to  him  that  worketh  not,  but 
believeth  on  him  that  justifieth  the  ungodly,  his  faith  is  count- 
ed for  righteousness."  Rom.  iv.  2 — 6.  See  also  2  Cor.  v.  19. 
"  For  he  hath  made  him  to  be  sin  for  us,  who  knew  no  sin 
that  we  might  be  made  the  righteousness  of  God  in  him." 
(2  Cor.  V.  21.) 

These  and  similar  texts  of  Scripture  we  humbly  commend 
to  the  special  attention  of  those,  who  thunder  their  anathe- 
mas upon  all  abettors  of  the  doctrine  of  justification  through 
the  imputed  righteousness  of  Christ. 


CONCERNING  JUSTIFICATION.  71 

The  Protestant  will  be  surprised  to  learn  that  the  prophet 
Jeremiah  "  did  penance^''^  but  if  he  will  turn  to  the  Doway 
Bible,  Jer.  xxxi.  19.,  he  will  find  it  is  even  so.  The  prophet 
there  gives  it  as  part  of  his  experience,  "  When  thou  didst 
convert  me,  I  did  penance."  Learn  hence  the  antiquity 
of  this  sacrament. 

So  too,  Peter  on  the  day  of  Pentecost  answers  the  con- 
victed Jews,  who  asked  "  what  must  we  do  ?"  "  Do  pen- 
ance !"  To  be  sure — what  else  could  they  do  ?  The  pen- 
ance, which  Peter  imposed  on  them,  is,  however,  not  record- 
ed. It  is  to  be  regretted  that  Jeremiah  does  not  mention 
either,  in  what  his  penance  consisted.  That  would  have  set- 
tled the  matter. 

But  we  are  farther  reminded  that  the  Apostle  James  tells 
us,  "  By  works  a  man  is  justified  and  not  by  faith."  The 
apparent  discrepancy  between  the  epistles  of  Paul  and  James 
will  vanish  at  once,  when  the  circumstances  under  which 
the  latter  apostle  wrote  are  taken  into  consideration.  Already 
in  his  day,  the  leaven  of  Antinomianism  was  at  work.  Even 
then  there  were  men  wicked  enough  to  teach  that  we  are  de- 
livered by  the  Gospel  from  all  obedience  to  the  Moral  Law. 
They  who  embraced  this  error  of  course  professed  that  their 
faith  was  suflicient  for  justification,  though  it  produced  no 
change  in  the  moral  character  and  no  reformation  in  their 
daily  practice.  Paul  insists  upon  the  necessity  of  good 
works  being  the  fruit  and  evidence  of  faith,  just  as  strongly 
as  James.  Paul  commends  the  "  faith  that  works  by 
love,"  and  says  expressly,  "  With  the  heart  man  believeth 
unto  righteousness."  And  a  greater  than  Paul  had  taught, 
"  By  their  fruits  ye  shall  know  them."  Now  a  faith  that 
does  not  produce  the  great  moral  results  required  by  the 
Gospel,  cannot  be  the  faith  of  Christians.  Hence  the  apos- 
tle says — "  Thou  believest  that  there  is  one  God  ;  thou  doest 
well ;  the  devils  also  believe  and  tremble."  They  are  the 
subjects  of  speculative  belief,  but  their  faith  not  working  by 


72  CONCERNING  JUSTIFICATION. 

love,  is  after  all  but  the  faith  of  devils,  though  they  do  trem- 
ble. He  then  adds,  "  But  wilt  thou  know,  O  vain  man !  (or 
hypocrite)  that  faith  without  works  is  dead."  Now  surely 
it  will  not  be  contended  that  the  faith  of  the  hypocrite  is  the 
faith  of  the  Gospel ;  but  it  is  of  this  faith  that  James  speaks. 

The  objection  which  is  made  to  the  distinction  between 
historical  faith,  the  faith  of  miracles,  and  the  faith  of  pro- 
mises, can  scarcely  be  sustained.  If  the  distinction  is  re- 
jected, and  we  assume  that  there  is  only  one  kind  of  faith, 
then  the  devils  who  believe,  have  Gospel  faith ! 

But  it  is  against  "  special  faith"  or  "  assurance"  that  the 
venom  of  our  Theologian  is  particularly  directed.  Accord- 
ing to  the  doctrine  of  the  Romish  church  no  man  can  be 
sure  of  his  acceptance,  except  by  special  revelation — and 
even  then  he  cannot  know  it  "  with  absolute  moral  certainty, 
which  excludes  all  fear."  Now,  we  know  that  some  good 
men  have  frequently  not  been  sufficiently  discriminating  in 
relation  to  this  doctrine.  We  do  not  believe  that  assurance 
is  necessary  to  salvation.  It  is  the  privilege,  however,  of 
every  Christian  to  know  that  he  has  passed  from  death  to 
life.  "  Hereby  we  know  that  we'  have  passed  from  death  to 
life,  because  we  love  the  brethren."  To  this  Scripture  ob- 
jection is  made,  and  the  reader  may  perhaps  see  more  force 
in  Peter  Dens'  reasoning  than  I  can  discern. 

St.  John  says,  "  Hereby  we  know  that  he  abideth  in  us, 
by  the  spirit  which  he  hath  given  us."  1  John,  iii.  34.  In- 
deed, il  seems  as  though  one  of  the  principal  objects  of  this 
apostle's  epistles  is  to  furnish  the  Christian  with  suggestions 
and  texts  by  which  he  may  try  and  know  his  true  character. 

But  the  strangest  assertion  of  all  is,  that  "  it  is  disputed 
concerning  Paul,  whether  his  justification  and  predestina- 
tion were  revealed  to  him."  How  then  could  Paul  say,  "  I 
am  now  ready  to  be  offered  up,  and  the  time  of  my  depar- 
ture is  at  hand,  &c.  Henceforth  there  is  laid  up  for  me  a 
crown  of  righteousness,  which  the  Lord,  the  righteous  judge, 


CONCERNING  JUSTIFICATION.  73 

shall  give  unto  me  on  that  day,  and  not  unto  me  only,  but 
unto  all  them  also  that  love  his  appearing."  2  Tim.  iv.  6,  8. 
And  again,  "  I  know  in  whom  I  have  believed,  and  I  am 
persuaded  that  he  is  able  to  keep  that  which  I  have  committed 
unto  him  against  that  day."  2  Tim.  i.  12.  And  not  to  mul- 
tiply quotations  or  extend  these  remarks,  already  too  lengthy, 
any  farther,  how  could  Paul  without  strong  assurance  of  his 
acceptance,  exclaim  in  that  transport  of  holy  boldness,  "Who 
is  he  that  condemneth  ?  It  is  Christ  that  died,  yea,  rather, 
that  is  risen  again,  who  is  even  at  the  right  hand  of  God, 
who  also  maketh  intercession  for  us.  Who  shall  separate 
us  from  the  love  of  Christ  ?  shall  tribulation,  or  distress,  or 
persecution,  or  famine,  or  nakedness,  or  peril,  or  sword  ?  As 
it  is  written.  For  thy  sake  we  are  killed  all  the  day  long ; 
we  are  accounted  as  sheep  for  the  slaughter.  Nay,  in  all  these 
things  we  are  more  than  conquerors  through  him  that  loved 
us.  ^or  I  am  persuaded  that  neither  death,  nor  life,  nor 
angels,  nor  principalities,  nor  powers,  nor  things  present, 
nor  things  to  come,  nor  height,  nor  depth,  nor  any  other 
creature,  shall  be  able  to  separate  us  from  the  love  of  God, 
which  is  in  Christ  Jesus  our  Lord." — Rom.  viii.  34 — 39. 

Most  sincerely  do  we  wish  that  our  brethren  would  search 
the  Scriptures,  and  see  for  themselves  whether  the  Christian 
is  obliged  to  grope  his  way  by  the  feeble  glimmering  of 
"  probable  conjecture,"  or  whether  his  "  path"  is  not  as  the 
shining  light,  which  shineth  more  and  more  unto  the  perfect 
day  ?  "  Fot  we  have  not  received  the  spirit  of  bondage  again 
to  fear,  but  the  spirit  of  adoption,  whereby  we  cry,  Abba, 
Father." — Rom.  viii.  15. 


74  CONCERNING  MERIT. 


CHAPTER  XI. 

[No.  35.] 

Treatise  concerning  Merit* 

"  What  is  merit,  the  second  effect  of  grace  ? 

"  Ans,  It  is  a  good  work,  worthy  of  reward  or  recom- 
pense. 

"  This  definition  explains  merit  taken  in  the  concrete  for 
a  meritorious  action;  for  merit  in  the  abstract  denotes  the 
worth  of  the  work  itself,  by  the  power  of  which  it  is  adapted 
to  induce  (any  one)  to  reward. 

"  How  is  merit  divided  1 

"  Ans.  Into  merit  of  fitness  and  merit  of  worthiness. — A 
work  is  called  a  merit  of  fitness  to  which  some  reward  or 
recompense  is  ascribed  from  gratuitous  liberality  and  pro- 
priety ;  a  merit  of  worthiness  is  a  work  to  which  a  reward 
or  payment  is  due  from  justice.  Thus,  the  actions  of  a  just 
man  working  by  grace,  merit  worthily  grace  and  glory  : 
but  the  supernatural  acts  of  a  penitent  sinner,  merit  ulterior 
graces  from  propriety. 

"  Can  a  man  merit  any  thing  ? 

"  Observe,  the  question  is  not  concerning  merit,  strictly  so 
called,  which  is  of  such  a  nature,  in  itself,  and  from  the  dig- 
nity of  the  person  meriting,  that  a  reward  is  due  to  him 
according  to  the  perfect  rigour  of  justice,  for  this  pertains  to 
Christ  alone  :  but  reference  is  had  to  merit  less  strictly  taken, 
and  simply  to  such. 

"  It  is  an  article  of  faith,  contrary  to  our  heretics,  that  a 
person  by  grace  can  truly  and  properly  merit. 

*'This  is  proved  from  Holy  Scripture.  Matt.  v.  12,  it  is 
said,  *  your  reward  is  very  great  in  heaven ;'  moreover, 
2  Tim.  iv.  8.  *  There  is  laid  up  for  me  a  crown  of  justice, 
which  the  Lord,  the  just  judge,  will  render  to  me  at  that 
day;'  also,  Heb.  vi.  10.  *  For  God  is  not  unjust  that  he 
should    forget    your   work.'      But   reward   corresponds   to 

*  The  reader  will  please  take  notice  that  I  quote  from  the  Doway 
Bible,  when  Peter  Dens  refers  to  the  Scriptures,  and  from  the  Holy 
Bible  in  my  own  remarks. 


CONCERNING  MERIT.  75 

merit ;  and  that  which  is  given  by  God  the  just  judge,  also 
that  which  is  given  from  justice  is  given  for  the  sake  of 
merit :  therefore,  &c. 

"  From  these  passages  it  is  plain  that  eternal  life  also  may 
fall  under  merit,  and  even  on  the  ground  of  worthiness :  for 
merit  of  fitness  is  not  merit  of  the  real  kind. 

"  These  points  have  been  settled,  Council  of  Trent,  Sep. 
6.  ch.  16,  canon  32.  *  If  any  one  shall  say,  that  the  good 
works  of  a  justified  man  do  not  truly  merit  an  increase  of 
grace,  eternal  life,  and  the  attainment  of  eternal  life  itself, 
on  condition,  however,  that  he  shall  die  in  a  state  of  grace, 
and  even  an  increase  of  glory,  let  him  be  accursed.' 

"  Ohj.  I,  Rom.  viii.  18,  it  is  said,  '  The  sufferings  of  this 
present  time  are  not  worthy  to  be  compared  with  the  glory 
to  come,  &c. :'  therefore  our  works  do  not  worthily  merit 
eternal  life. 

"  I  deny  the  inference :  for  the  sense  of  the  apostle  is, 
that  the  suiferings  and  tribulations  of  this  life  are  not  equal 
in  respect  of  pain  and  grief  to  future  glory  in  respect  of 
pleasure  and  joy. 

"  This  answer  is  confirmed  ;  because,  2  Cor.  iv.  17,  the 
apostle  says,  '  For  our  present  tribulation,  which  is  momen- 
tary and  light,  worketh  for  us  above  measure  exceedingly, 
an  eternal  weight  of  glory  :'  whence,  although  the  sufferings, 
in  respect  to  their  pain,  are  not  equal  with  the  celestial  glory ; 
yet,  inasmuch  as  they  proceed  from  a  just  man  through 
grace,  they  are  worthy  of  eternal  life  in  respect  of  merit. 

"O^'.  //.  Luke  xvii.  10,  Christ  says,  *  When  you  shall 
have  done  all  the  things  that  are  commanded  you,  say :  We 
are  unprofitable  servants ;  we  have  done  that  which  we  ought 
to  do ;'  therefore,  we  merit  nothing. 

"  Ans.  1.  I  deny  the  inference ;  because  we  are  called  un- 
profitable servants  for  the  reason  that  by  our  works  no  ad- 
vantage can  accrue  to  God ;  but  this  is  consistent  with  the 
fact  that  they  are  useful  to  us,  and  meritorious  before  God  : 
whence  Christ  says,  Matt.  xxv.  21. — '  Well  done,  thou  good 
and  faithful  servant.' 

"JLws.  2.  We  are  commanded  to  feel  humbly  concerning 
ourselves,  and  to  think  either  that  we  have  done  nothing,  or 
that  we  are  worthy  of  no  reward  ;  as  we  have  done  nothing 
except  what  we  were  bound  to  do. 


76h  CONCERNING  MERIT. 

Obj.  III.  It  is  said,  Ps.  cii.  4. — '  Who  crowneth  thee  with 
mercy  and  compassion  ;'  and  Rom.  vi.  23. — '  The  grace  of 
God  (is)  everlasting  life  ;'  and  viii.  17. — 'If  sons,  heirs  also;' 
therefore,  no  one  can  merit  eternal  life. 

^^Ans.  I  deny  the  inference.  As  for  these  texts  and 
others,  observe  that  eternal  life  is  rightly  called  reward,  grace, 
mercy,  &c.  It  is  called  a  reward,  inasmuch  as  it  is  given 
for  the  sake  of  merits ;  it  is  called  an  inheritance,  because  it 
is  given  to  adopted  sons ;  it  is  called  mercy  and  grace,  be- 
cause our  merits  proceed  from  grace — because  God  has  mer- 
cifully and  freely  promised  eternal  life  to  good  works ;  also, 
because  election  to  glory  has  been  made  merely  of  grace. 

**  Neither  do  our  merits  diminish  the  meritorious  virtue  of 
Christ,  as  the  heretics  babble:  because  our  merits  derive  all 
power  of  meriting  from  the  merits  of  Christ,  just  as  the 
branches  (derive)  from  the  vine  the  power  of  bearing  fruit : 
and  hence,  our  merits  commend  the  merits  of  Christ,  inas- 
much as  by  his  own  merits  he  has  obtained  for  us  the  power 
of-  meriting. 

"  Obj.  IV.  God  cannot  be  a  debtor  to  men,  because  he  is 
the  supreme  Lord :  and  our  works  are  due  to  him  by  various 
claims. 

^^Ans.  I  deny  the  antecedent:  because,  although  God 
cannot  be  a  debtor  to  men  on  account  of  men,  he  may  still 
be  a  debtor  to  men  on  his  own  account,  and  his  own  appoint- 
ment, by  which  he  himself  has  thought  proper  thus  to  or- 
dain. 

*'  In  order  to  furnish  (farther)  proof  (observe),  that  in  case 
God  should  determine  to  deal  with  man  according  to  his  own 
absolute  right,  then  man  could  merit  nothing  worthily  before 
God ;  but  as  God  has  already  resolved  to  promise  a  reward 
to  those  works ;  hence,  now  arises  the  obligation  of  justice." 

Of  meriting  worthily.    (37.) 

"  What  conditions  are  requisite  to  merit  worthily  before 
God? 

"  Seven  are  requisite,  of  which  four  relate  to  the  action, 
namely :  that  it  be  free,  good,  performed  from  actual  grace, 
and  for  the  sake  of  obedience  to  God ;  two  relate  to  the  per- 
son performing  it,  viz. :  that  he  be  a  traveller  (upon  earth), 
and  in  a  state  of  sanctifying  grace ;  the  seventh  relates  to 


CONCERNING  MERIT.  77 

God,  viz. :  that  a  divine  promise  intervenes,  by  which  a  re- 
ward is  promised  to  such  work. 

"  What  does  the  first  condition  imply  ? 

"  That  the  work  must  be  free  with  the  liberty  of  indiffer- 
ence ;"  (i.  e.  liberty  of  doing  or  not  doing  a  thing ;)  "  and 
it  is  an  article  of  faith  since  the  condemnation  of  the  third 
proposition  of  Jansenius." 

*'  What  does  the  second  condition  mean  ? 

"  That  indifferent  works,  if  such  were  performed  by  an 
individual,  are  not  meritorious. 

"  What  is  imported  by  the  third  condition  1 

"  That  works  only  morally  good,  viz. :  those  which  are 
performed  by  the  powers  of  nature  alone,  are  not  merito- 
rious, although  they  might  be  done  by  a  good  man :  because 
they  do  not  proceed  from  grace,  of  which  merit  is  the  effect ; 
neither  are  they  proportionate  to  supernatural  merit,  as  they 
are  natural. 

"  What  is  signified  by  the  fourth  condition  ? 

"  That  a  work  ought  to  be  referred  to  obedience  to  God : 
because,  otherwise,  there  would  be  no  reason  why  a  reward 
should  be  expected  from  him,  especially  according  to  justice. 

"  Observe,  that  as  well  good  works,  which  are  (performed 
in  obedience)  of  a  precept,  as  those  which  are  (in  pursuance) 
of  counsel,  may  be  meritorious  :  for,  Matt.  xix.  17,  eternal 
life  is  promised  to  those  who  keep  the  commandments : — 
*  If  thou  wilt  enter  into  life,  keep  the  commandments ;'  and 
verse  29,  the  same  life  is  promised  to  those  who  keep  the 
Evangelical  counsels  :  *  Every  one  that  hath  lefl  house,  or 

brethren,  or  sisters, for  my  name's  sake,  shall  receive  a 

hundred  fold,  and  shall  possess  life  everlasting.'  Indeed, 
the  endurance  of  diseases  and  other  afflictions  can  be  mer- 
itorious and  satisfactory ;  because  that  endurance  may  be 
freely  received  by  the  will  out  of  grace  and  love. 

"  Prove  the  fifth  condition,  namely,  that  the  person  must 
be  a  traveller  (upon  earth.) 

"  It  seems  that  this  cannot  be  proved  from  natural  reason  ; 
but  the  necessity  of  this  condition  appears  to  proceed  from 
the  positive  divine  decree,  manifested  to  us  from  Holy  Scrip- 
ture, and  the  common  opinion  of  the  church ;  thus,  it  is 
said,  Ecclesiasticus  xiv.  17,  *  Before  thy  death,  work  justice ; 
for  in  hell  there  is  no  finding  food ;'  John  ix.  4,  Christ  says, 
7 


78  CONCERNING  MERIT. 

*  The  night  cometh,  when  no  man  can  work :'  by  night, 
meaning  death :  after  which  he  asserts  no  one  can  merito- 
riously work. 

"  Hence,  St.  Jerome  says,  &c.  *  The  time  of  sowing  is 
the  present  life ;  when  this  has  past,  the  season  of  working 
is  gone;'  and  St.  Thomas,  &c.  'It  must  be  said  that  merit 
and  demerit  pertain  to  the  state  of  life.' 

"  Infer  that  the  blessed  in  heaven,  souls  in  purgatory, 
and  the  damned  in  hell,  although  the  latter  do  not  cease  to 
sin,  and  the  former  persevere  in  good  works,  yet  do  not  any 
more  merit  or  demerit  by  them,  so  that  their  happipess  or 
damnation  might  be  increased. 

"  The  Lord  Christ,  although  he  was  perfect,  or  blessed 
from  the  first  instant  of  his  conception,  was  at  the  same  time 
also  a  traveller,  (upon  earth),  and  so  long  only  he  merited. 
The  saints  by  their  prayers  obtain  blessings  for  us  from 
God ;  but  they  do  not  properly  merit  them,  not  even  on  the 
ground  of  propriety. 

"  Who  is  said  to  be  a  traveller,  or  in  a  state  of  wayfaring? 

"  He  who  lives  in  the  body  in  a  mortal  condition.  Hence, 
it  becomes  probable  that  Enoch  and  Elias  do  not  in  fact 
merit,  because  they  do  not  live  in  a  mortal  state. 

"  Prove  the  sixth  condition,  that  a  person  ought  to  be  in  a 
state  of  sanctifying  grace. 

"  It  is  proved  from  John  xv.  4,  '  As  the  branch  cannot 
bear  fruit  of  itself,  except  it  abide  in  the  vine,  so  neither  can 
you,  unless  you  abide  in  me ;'  also,  1  Cor.  xiii,  3.  *  If  I 
should  distribute  all  my  goods  to  feed  the  poor,  &c.,  and 
have  not  charity,  it  profiteth  me  nothing.' 

"  The  same  can  be  proved  from  Council  of  Trent,  Sess.  6. 
chap.  16,  and  from  the  condemnation  of  the  12th,  13th, 
15th,  17th,  and  18th  of  the  propositions  of  Bajus. 

"  Therefore,  the  good  works  of  sinners,  even  proceeding 
from  actual  grace,  before  the  application  of  habitual  grace, 
are  not  meritorious  on  the  ground  of  worthiness. 

"  Does  the  sinner  therefore  in  vain  apply  himself  to  good 
works  ? 

"  By  no  means :  for  although  they  are  not  strictly  merito- 
rious, yet  if  they  are  performed  through  the  incipient  desire 
of  converting  himself  to  God,  excited  by  grace,  they  are 
preparatory  to  grace,  and  are  productive  of  it. 


CONCERNING  MERIT.  79 

"  Show  that  the  seventh  condition  is  necessary,  viz.  that 
a  divine  promise  should  intervene. 

"It  is  evident;  because  unless  this  promise  intervened,^ 
there  would  be  no  title  from  which  an  obligation  of  justice 
could  originate  ,*  as  God  is  the  Supreme  Lord  of  all,  and  thus 
he  might  exact  all  our  works  by  various  claims,  as  due  to 
himself." 

"  Holy  Scripture  shows  that  this  promise  has  been  made, 
James  i.  12,  '  He  shall  receive  the  crown  of  life,  which  God 
has  promised  to  them  that  love  him ;'  and  Heb.  x.  36,  *  That 
doing  the  will  of  God,  ye  may  receive  the  promise.'  Hence 
the  Council  of  Trent  says,  &c.,  sess.  6,  chap.  16. 

"  ObJ.  Many  illiterate  persons  are  ignorant  of  that  pro- 
mise, but  yet  they  do  not  therefore  cease  to  merit ;  there- 
fore, &c. 

"  I  deny  the  inference ;  because  it  is  not  necessary  that  all 
the  faithful  should  explicitly  know  that  promise;  but  it  is 
sufficient  for  some  that  they  implicitly  know  it  in  this,  that 
they  believe  God  to  be  the  dispenser  of  the  reward  of  eternal 
glory. 

"Are,  therefore,  any  works  meritorious  on  the  ground  of 
worthiness  ? 

"  I  answer  with  St.  Thomas,  &c..  Every  human  action 
which  proceeds  from  free  will,  moved  not  only  by  actual 
grace,  but  also  instructed  by  sanctifying  grace,  if  it  may  be 
referred  to  God,  is  worthily  meritorious ;  and  thus  not  only 
acts  of  charity  but  also  of  temperance,  justice,  and  every 
virtue,  are  meritorious  of  eternal  life,  and  though  merit  pri- 
marily pertains  to  charity,  as  St.  Thomas  says,  yet  it  per- 
tains secondarily  also  to  other  virtues,  inasmuch  as  their 
acts  are  enjoined  or  taught  by  charity. 

"  What  conditions  are  requisite  to  merit  on  the  ground  of 
propriety  and  by  a  person  in  a  state  of  probation? 

"  These,  that  the  work  be  free,  good,  performed  through 
actual  grace,  and  for  the  purpose  of  obedience  towards  God  ; 
yet  a  state  of  grace  is  not  required,  nor  a  divine  promise." 

The  doctrine  of  merit  as  taught  in  the  standards  of  the 
Romish  church  is  so  directly  at  variance  with  the  letter  and 
spirit  of  the  Bible  that  it  refutes  itself,  when  simply  con- 
trasted with  the  plain  testimony  of  Scripture,  which  is,  never- 


80  CONCERNING  MERIT. 

theless,  summoned  as  a  witness  in  its  favour.  If  we  arc 
"saved  by  grace,"  as  Paul  declares,  then  we  cannot  be 
^  saved  by  merit.  The  texts  which  have  been  adduced  in  the 
preceding  translation  of  the  two  leading  chapters  on  merit, 
as  heretical  objections,  cannot  be  invalidated  by  the  flimsy, 
though  occasionally  plausible  arguments  which  are  offered  in 
reply.  It  is  not  worth  while  to  examine  them  all  in  detail, 
as  the  general  principles  which  controvert  them,  have  been 
mentioned  in  the  preceding  chapter,  in  defence  of  Justifica- 
tion by  faith  ;  but  we  will  briefly  instance  one  or  two. 
When  the  following  passage  is  stated  in  full,  the  answer 
which  Peter  Dens  gives  to  it,  will  appear  even  still  more 
feeble  than  in  its  present  form.  "Doth  the  master  thank 
his  servant  because  he  did  the  things  that  were  commanded 
him  ?  I  trow  not.  So  likewise  ye,  when  ye  shall  have 
done  all  those  things  which  are  commanded  you,  say  we 
are  unprofitable  servants,  we  have  done  that  which  was  our 
duty  to  do."  If  we  were  to  exhibit  angelic  obedience  to 
every  command  of  God,  if  we  had  never  sinned  even  in 
thought,  we  could  claim  no  reward  on  this  account — we 
should  have  done  no  more  than  our  duty,  and  should  simply 
have  paid  a  just  debt.  But  who  is  there  that  has  not  offend- 
ed in  many  things  ?  And  if  the  least  offence  is  a  transgres- 
sion of  a  law  which  is  holy,  just,  and  good—if  every  sin  is 
committed  against  a  God  whose  perfections  are  infinite,  and 
whose  wrath  is  revealed  from  heaven  against  all  unrighteous- 
ness, how  can  we  lay  claim  to  merit,  when  if  saved  from 
death  and  hell,  it  must  be  alone  through  the  exercise  of 
sovereign  grace  and  mercy  1 

In  Rom.  vi.  23,  which  our  theologian  professes  to  quote 
thus,  "  the  grace  of  God  (is)  everlasting  life,"  we  read  these 
words  :  "  For  the  wages  of  sin  is  death,  but  the  gift;  of  God 
(is)  eternal  life,  through  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord."  Here  the 
apostle  evidently  wishes  to  contrast  "the  wages  of  sin"  with 
"the^r/iofGod." 


THEOLOGICAL  VIRTUES.  81 

The  sinner  merits  death  worthily,  but  the  believer  receives 
eternal  life  as  a  "  gift."  And  lest  any  one  should  suppose 
it  to  be  given  (to  the  saint)  as  a  nnark  of  approbation  on 
account  of  his  good  works,  Paul  adds,  "  through  Jesus  Christ 
our  Lord."  Not  only  so,  but  the  believer  cannot  do  a  good 
work  without  grace  ;  this  the  church  of  Rome  adnnits,  and 
yet  in  the  very  face  of  this  concession,  she  denounces  the 
heretics  who  "  babble"  against  the  condign  merits  of  the 
saints ! 


CHAPTER   XII. 
TREATISE  CONCERNING  THEOLOGICAL  VIRTUES.  ] 
Concerning  the  Virtue  of  Faith.     (No.  8.) 

"  There  are  three  theological  virtues  which  the  apostle 
mentions,  I  Cor.  xiii.  13,  saying — Now  there  remain  faith, 
hope,  charity,  these  three. 

"  These  virtues  are  called  theological,  commonly  divine, 
(in  Dutch,  Goddelyke  Deugden  ;  in  French,  Vertus  Theolo- 
gales),  principally  because  they  treat  immediately  about 
God,  or  because  they  have  God  for  their  formal  and  mate- 
rial primary  object :  farther,  because  these  virtues  are  made 
known  by  revelation  alone  in  the  sacred  Scripture,  and  thus 
were  first  discovered  by  Christian  theologians,  who  investi- 
gate matters  of  revelation." 

"  The  word  faith  is  variously  received. 

"  Sometimes  it  is  taken  for  fidelity  in  promises,  as  Rom. 
iii.  3,  '  Shall  their  unbelief  make  the  faith  of  God  of  none 
effect  r 

"  2.  It  is  taken  for  the  promises  themselves  and  for  a 
vow ;  as  1  Tim.  v.  12,  it  is  said,  concerning  certain  widows, 
'  They  have  made  void  their  first  faith.* 

"  3.  It  sometimes  denotes  conscience ;  as  Rom.  xiv.  23. 
*  All  that  is  not  of  faith  is  sin.'  In  this  sense  also,  any  one 
is  called  a  possessor  of  good  or  bad  faith. 


82  THEOLOGICAL  VIRTUES. 

"  4.  It  is  taken  for  confidence ;  as  James  i.  6,  '  But  let 
him  ask  in  faith  nothing  wavering.' 

"  5.  It  comes  also  sometimes  for  the  object  of  faith  ;  thus 
in  the  Symbol  of  St.  Athanasius,  it  is  said:  *This  is  the 
Catholic  faith.' 

"  6.  Omitting  other  acceptations  of  faith,  it  is  taken  more 
commonly  for  the  assent  of  the  understanding,  or  for  the 
disposition  inclining  to  afford  assent  on  account  of  the  au- 
thority of  another.  If  that  authority  is  human,  it  is  called 
human  faith ;  if  it  is  divine,  it  is  said  (to  be)  divine  or  theo- 
logical ;  which,  if  it  respects  the  truths  proposed  by  the 
church,  is  named  the  Catholic  faith.  In  this  signification, 
we  treat  of  faith  in  this  place." 

"  What  is  faith  ?    (No.  9.) 

"  Ans.  It  is  rightly  defined  by  Canisius :  A  gift  of  God, 
and  a  light,  illumined  by  which  a  person  firmly  assents  to  all 
things  which  God  has  revealed,  and  proposed  to  us  through 
the  church  to  be  believed,  whether  these  things  are  written 
or  are  not  (written). 

"  It  is  called,  1  ;  '  A  gifi;  of  God  ;'  because  it  is  given  gra- 
tuitously by  God  alone,  and  surpasses  all  the  powers  of  na- 
ture: for  divine  faith,  both  unformed  and  formed,  (i.  e.  dead 
'  and  living,)  both  actual  and  habitual,  is  essentially  superna- 
tural. 

"  It  is  called,  2  ;  '  A  light ;'  that  is  to  say,  a  spiritual  one,  by 
which  the  intellect  is  elevated  and  enlightened  to  know  and 
believe  those  things,  which  are  (matters)  of  faith,  &c. 

"  It  is  said,  3;  *  Firmly  assents;'  because  the  assent  of 
faith  ought  to  be  firm  and  certain,  without  any  doubt,  hesi- 
tation, or  fear  about  its  opposite ;  as  it  rests  upon  the  truth 
of  God  himself 

"  It  is  said,  4  ;  *  To  all  things  which  God  has  revealed  ;' 
by  which  is  denoted  that  it  is  the  adequate  material  object 
of  faith,  that  these  things  are  all  and  alone  revealed  by  God: 
whence  is  also  signified  that  the  formal  object  of  faith  is  the 
highest  truth  of  God  who  reveals  it. 

"It  is  said,  5  ;  *And  proposed  to  us  through  the  church 
to  be  believed ;'  by  which  is  signified  the  cause  proposing 
objects  of  faith ;  for  without  the  creed  of  the  church  it  is  not 
plain  to  us  that  any  article  has  been  revealed  by  God ;  and 
hence  the  motive  of  credibility  is  signified :  for  the  creed  of 
the  church  makes  things  evidently  credible. 


THEOLOGICAL  VIRTUES.  83 

"  It  is  said,  0  ;  '  Whether  they  arc  written  or  are  not ;'  by 
which  is  farther  denoted  that  truths  to  be  beheved  are  partly 
contained  in  the  written  word  of  God,  or  the  Holy  Scripture, 
partly  in  the  word  of  God  (that  has  been)  handed  down,  or 
in  divine  tradition. 

*'  There  is  another  description  of  faith,  which  the  apostle 
gives,  Ileb.  xi.  1,  in  which  faith  is  called  '  The  substance  of 
things  hoped  for,  the  conviction  of  things  that  appear  not.' 

"  This  description  St.  Thomas  proves  to  be  proper,  and 
reduces  it  into  this  form  :  '  Faith  is  a  habit  of  the  mind,  by 
which  eternal  life  begins  in  us,  making  the  understanding 
assent  to  things  which  do  not  appear.' 

"  It  is  called,  1  ;  '  The  substance  of  things  hoped  for ;'  that 
is,  the  basis  or  foundation  upon  which  our  hope,  or  the  whole 
salvation  (for)  which  we  hope,  rests :  according  to  others,  it 
is  the  substance  or  subsistence;  because  it  makes  eternal 
blessings  (for)  which  we  hope,  in  some  measure  subsist  in 
us,  by  rendering  us  as  certain  concerning  them  as  if  they 
were  already  possessed  by  us. 

"  It  is  called,  2  ;  '  The  evidence  of  things,  which  appear 
not ;'  that  is,  the  conviction ;  because  the  understanding 
through  faith  is  convinced  of  the  truth  of  things,  which  are 
perceived  neither  by  sense  nor  by  reason. 

"  ObJ.  Hell  is  a  thing,  which  is  believed  by  faith  :  but 
yet  it  is  not  a  thing  to  be  hoped  for ;  therefore  this  definition 
is  not  proper. 

"Atis.  The  belief  of  hell  is  contained  under  the  last 
words  of  the  definition,  inasmuch  as  faith  is  called  the  con- 
viction of  things,  which  appear  not. 

"  And  hence  observe,  not  every  object  of  faith  is  an  object 
of  hope ;  or  that  a  person  believes  some  things,  which  he 
does  not  hope  for ;  such  are,  evils,  or  past  or  present  bless- 
ings." (No.  91.) 

The  definition  of  faith  which  our  author  extols  so  highly, 
and  which  with  characteristic  modesty  is  placed  in  advance 
of  the  inspired  apostle's  description,  militates  against  the 
Scriptural  view,  and  as  the  theory  is  unsound,  its  practical 
operation  must  be  pernicious.  So  soon  as  we  make  "  tradition" 
of  equal  authority  with  the  Word  of  God,  we  pave  the  way 


84  THEOLOGICAL  VIRTUES. 

for  the  introduction  of  articles  of  faith,  many  of  which  have 
no  firmer  foundation,  and  no  higher  origin  than  the  depraved 
imaginations  of  designing  or  deluded  men.  The  church  of 
Rome  includes  among  her  "  unwritten  verities,"  some  of  the 
most  monstrous  fictions  that  have  ever  been  fabricated ;  she 
has  actually  recorded  among  her  traditions  a  vast  amount 
of  matter,  which  cannot  be  named  without  exciting  derision 
and  contempt,  among  the  more  enlightened  of  her  own  com- 
munion. To  make  the  idle  stories,  which  are  registered  in 
the  Breviary  concerning  the  immediate  disciples  of  the  Sa- 
viour, and  other  saints,  of  equal  authority  with  the  Word  of 
God,  to  a  Protestant  at  least,  appears  no  better  than  sheer 
blasphemy  !  We  put  it  to  the  conscience  of  any  intelligent 
and  candid  Romanist,  whether  it  does  not  at  least  wear  the 
appearance  of  wanton  irreverence,  to  affirm  that  the  prepos- 
terous fables,  (we  can  call  them  nothing  better),  concerjiing 
the  Virgin  Mary,  Mary  Magdalen,  &c.,  are  to  be  regarded 
as  equally  authentic  with  the  narratives  of  the  Holy  Scrip- 
ture? Is  it  likely  that  Magdalen  lived  so  many  years  in  a 
cave,  secluded  from  the  world,  and  that  once  a  day  she  was 
carried  by  angels  to  heaven,  to  listen  to  the  songs  of  the  glorifi- 
ed spirits  before  the  throne,  &c.  1  Yet  this  Tradition  teaches. 

The  worship  of  images  is  called  an  apostolic  tradition. 
But  is  it  not  strange  that  all  the  apostles  are  silent  in  rela- 
tion to  the  proper  veneration,  which  is  alleged  to  be  due  to 
them?  And  that,  when  cautioning  the  Christian  converts 
against  the  idolatry  of  the  Gentiles,  they  never  stop  to  make 
a  single  distinction  relative  to  image  worship  ? 

The  kissing  of  the  altar,  and  the  blessing  of  incense,  are 
enjoined  by  Tradition.  Tradition  is  the  parent  of  the  ortho- 
dox turnings  and  facings  and  gesticulations  of  the  priests, 
the  swinging  of  the  chahce,  the  adoration  of  the  host,  and 
other  strange  ceremonies,  which  may  be  witnessed  at  every 
celebration  of  the  Mass. 

In  the  Missal,  salt  is  conjured  or  exorcised,  and  is  said  to 


DIVISION  OF  FAITH.  85 

be  done  for  the  salvation  of  such  as  believe.  And  water  is 
blessed  in  order  to  expel  the  power  of  the  great  enemy :  for 
the  same  purpose  candles  are  also  blessed,  and  for  all  these 
practices,  the  priests  allege  Tradition.  Hence  too  the  power 
to  baptize  bells ;  which  by  this  consecration  acquire  the  won- 
derful virtue  of  driving  away  devils. 

Now  we  appeal  to  the  common  sense  of  every  rational 
man,  whether  it  is  not  the  height  of  irreverence  to  ascribe  to 
such  traditions  as  these,  the  authority  which  belongs  to 
Scripture  ?  Since  the  apostles  are  gone,  we  know  no  surer 
guide  than  their  written  words ;  "  to  which  we  do  well  to 
take  heed  as  to  a  light  that  shineth  in  a  dark  place ;  for  if 
we  fulfil  the  royal  law  according  to  the  Scriptures,  we  shall 
do  well." 

Surely  the  canon  of  Revelation  would  not  have  closed 
with  so  solemn  a  caution  against  adding  aught  to  its  words, 
if  important  doctrines  had  been  overlooked,  or  purposely 
not  inserted.  Whilst  we  cleave  to  the  Scripture  as  our  rule 
of  faith,  we  have  a  guide  that  we  may  trust;  but  when 
men  begin  to  follow  the  "  ignis  fatuus"  of  tradition,  they 
will  soon  be  lost  in  a  quagmire  of  superstition  and  folly,  and 
there  they  will  sink,  unless  God  in  mercy  pluck  them  from 
the  miry  clay,  and  set  their  feet  upon  the  rock  of  Eternal 
Truth. 


CHAPTER  XIII. 

Concerning  the  Division  of  Faith, 

"  How  is  the  theological  virtue,  faith,  divided? 

"  I.  Ans.  1.  It  is  divided  into  habitual  and  actual  faith. 

"  *.  Into  explicit  and  implicit  faith. 

"  3.  Into  internal  and  external  faith. 

"  4.  Into  formed  or  living,  and  unformed  or  dead  faith. 


86  DIVISION  OF  FAITH. 

"  What  is  habitual,  and  what  actual  faith  1 

"II.  Ans.  Habitual  faith  is  the  habit  of  faith  itself;  actual 
is  the  act  itself,  or  the  present  assent  of  faith. 

"  Which  faith  is  called  explicit,  and  which  implicit  1 

"  III.  Ans.  Explicit  faith  is  that  by  which  we  assent  to 
some  article  of  faith  in  itself,  and  known  by  its  own  terms. 

"  IV.  Ans.  Implicit  is  that  by  which  certain  truths  are 
believed,  contained,  not  in  themselves  and  in  their  own 
terms,  but  in  some  other  as  universal  or  principal,  or  as 
cause,  medium,  figure,  &c.  Thus,  he  who  explicitly  be- 
lieves that  there  were  two  distinct  natures  in  Christ,  also 
implicitly  believes  that  there  were  in  him  two  wills  and  ope- 
rations, proceeding  from  both  natures.  Just  so,  he  who 
explicitly  believes  whatever  God  has  revealed,  or  whatever 
the  church  proposes  to  be  believed,  implicitly  believes  that 
there  are  seven  sacraments  of  the  new  law,  even  though  he 
should  not  know  them. 

"  What  is  internal,  and  what  is  external  faith  1 

"  V.  Ans.  The  former  is  the  assent  of  faith  conceived  in 
the  mind ;  the  latter  is  the  external  profession  of  internal 
faith  by  words,  actions,  or  other  signs. 

"  VI.  Ans.  What  formed  and  what  unformed  faith  is, 
appears  from  No.  2,  towards  the  close,  and  in  what  respects 
they  differ  from  one  another  from  No.  7,  towards  the 
close. 

The  following  are  the  passages  alluded  to. 

"  No.  2.  What  is  a  perfect  or  formed  virtue ;  what  is  an 
imperfect  or  unformed  (virtue?) 

"  Ans.  A  formed  (virtue)  is  that  which  is  combined  with 
habitual  charity  ;  because  charity  is  the  form,  the  end,  and 
perfection  of  the  other  virtues. 

"  A  virtue  is  said  to  be  unformed  which  is  in  (its)  subject, 
destitute  of  habitual  charity,  or  existing  in  mortal  sin." 

"No.  7.  The  other  virtues  without  charity  are  unformed 
and  imperfect,  because  destitute  of  accidental  and  extrinsic 
perfection  *  *  *  dead  faith  is  essentially  as  perfect  as 
living  faith ;  but  charity  effects  that  the  act  of  living  faith 
worthily  merits  eternal  life ;  but  such  is  not  the  act  of  un- 
formed (dead)  faith." 

I  have  given  this  section  concerning  the  division  of  faith 


DIVISION  OF  FAITH.  87 

at  length,  for  the  sake  of  convenient  reference ;  as  the  vari- 
ous terms  and  distinctions  of  faith  will  occur  frequently  in 
the  following  chapters. 

The  material  object  of  faith.     (12). 

The  object  of  faith  is  declared  to  be  two-fold — material 
and  formal. 

"^  What  is  the  material  object  of  faith,  or  what  ought  we 
to  believe  ? 

"They  are  all  those  things  which  God  has  revealed 
to  us." 

The  material  object  of  faith  is  distinguished  again,  as 
^^ primary  or  principal^  which  is  God,  and  all  those  things 
which  have  been  revealed  to  us  in  God ;  and  secondary^  and 
this,  all  other  things  revealed  to  us  by  God  constitute,  such 
are,  the  humanity  of  Christ,  the  sacraments,  &c."   *     *     * 

Matters  of  private  revelation,  such  as  v.  g.  were  made 
known  to  St.  Birgitta,  may  be  a  material  object  of  faith  to 
those  to  whom  they  have  been  revealed,  if  there  is  sufficient 
evidence  that  the  revelation  was  divine ;  but  such  things  do 
not  properly  belong  to  the  Catholic  faith.  Whatever  the 
Church  authoritatively  enjoins  is  a  material  object  of  faith. 

The  formal  object  of  faith.     (13). 

"  What  is  the  formal  object  of  faith  ? 

"  Ans.  It  is  the  first  or  highest  truth  of  God  who  reveals 
it,  which  is  founded  in  this,  that  God  on  account  of  his  infi- 
nite wisdom  cannot  be  deceived,  and  on  account  of  his  infi- 
nite goodness  and  perfection  cannot  deceive."     *     *     * 

The  assent  of  faith.     (14). 

"  Does  the  assent  of  our  faith  immediately  depend  upon 
any  reasoning,  discussion,  or  deduction  made  according  to 
the  legitimate  form  of  argumentation? 

"  Ans.  No ;  because  the  assent,  which  depends  upon  dis- 
cussion, has  for  a  partial  motive,  the  goodness  of  the  infer- 
ence ;  as  it  is  an  act  by  which  the  understanding  assents  to 
the  conclusion,  because  it  follows  clearly  from  the  premises: 
but  the  assent  of  faith  by  no  means  rests  upon  the  goodness 
of  the  conclusion,  but  the  adequate  motive  for  divine  faith  is 
the  first  truth  of  God,  who  reveals  it." 


ar  DIVISION  OF  FAITH. 

External  Motives  of  Credibility.    (18.) 

"  What  are  the  motives  of  credibility  ? 

"  Some  motives  of  credibility  are  external,  others  internal. 
Very  many  external  motives  of  credibility  are  mentioned  by 
S.  Thomas,  Bellarmine,  Wiggers  and  others,  from  which  we 
will  here  submit  the  principal. 

"  The  authority  of  the  church  affords  the  first  and  suf- 
ficient argument  of  credibility  ;  or  the  creed  of  the  church 
effulgent  by  its  own  marks,  (of  which  hereafter.) 

*'  The  second  is  derived  from  the  miracles  and  signs  by 
which  the  truths  of  our  faith  have  been  confirmed  by  Christ, 
the  apostles  and  preachers  down  to  these  times.  For  although 
miracles  are  the  peculiar  work  of  God,  and  as  it  were  seals 
of  divinity,  yet  they  can  be  performed  in  confirmation  of  the 
truth :  and  hence  are  found  never  to  have  been  done  in  con- 
firmation of  any  other  sect;  and  if  at  times  such  things  have 
been  divulged,  they  have  vanished  as  merely  marvellous,  or 
as  false  and  the  result  of  legerdemain. 

"  Among  miracles  may  be  enumerated,  the  power  over 
devils,  by  which  Christians  drive  them  out  of  bodies,  make 
them  silent,  &c. 

The  wonderful  propagation  of  the  faith  by  a  few  illiterate 
fishermen  is  also  mentioned,  (and  justly,)  as  properly  belong- 
ing to  the  evidence  from  miracles. 

The  third  motive  of  credibility  is  prophecy :  evidence  is 
adduced  from  the  predictions  relative  to  the  birth,  life,  death, 
resurrection,  &c.,  of  Christ,  the  calling  of  the  Gentiles,  rejec- 
tion of  the  Jews,  &c. 

"  And  lest  any  one  should  falsely  say,  that  these  prophe- 
cies were  fabricated  after  the  events  had  taken  place,  it  has 
been  effected  by  the  singular  providence  of  God,  that  the 
Jews  themselves,  the  most  violent  enemies  of  our  religion, 
have  carefully  preserved  those  books  and  prophecies  down 
to  these  times,  &c. 

"  The  fourth  argument  is  drawn  from  the  antiquity,  uni- 
versality, firmness  and  continuation  of  our  faith  ;  these  things 
St.  Aug.  has  briefly  and  nervously  expressed,  &c.,  saying 
— *  There  are  many  things,  which  most  justly  keep  me  in 
the  bosom  of  the  church ;  the  consent  of  nations  and  multi- 
tudes, the  authority,  commenced  by  miracles,  nourished  by 


DIVISION  OF  FAITH.  89 

hope,  increased  by  charity,  and  strengthened  by  antiquity : 
the  succession  of  priests  from  the  very  Seat  of  the  apostle 
Peter,  (keeps  me)  to  whom  the  Lord  entrusted  the  feeding  of 
his  siieep,  down  to  the  present  Episcopacy  :  finally  the  very 
name  of  catholic,  (keeps  me)  which  this  church  has  thus  ob- 
tained not  without  reason  among  so  many  heresies,  as  all 
heretics  wish  themselves  to  be  called  Catholics,  &c.  &c. — 

"To  these  add  the  sanctity  and  purity  of  the  doctrine  and 
members  of  the  church  :  for  those  things  wonderfully  conci- 
liate confidence  for  our  religion,  which  the  church  teaches 
concerning  virtues  and  vices,  concerning  the  reward  of  good 
works,  and  the  punishment  of  sinners,  concerning  the  wor- 
ship of  God  and  holiness  of  manners. 

"Finally,  the  constancy  of  innumerable  martyrs  of  every 
age,  sex,  and  condition,  who  have  sealed  the  Catholic  faith 
with  their  blood,  affords  an  invincible  argument  of  the  truth 
ofthe  faith—" 

Internal  motives  of  credibility,     (19.) 

The  internal  motive  of  credibility  is  two-fold,  viz :  the 
supernatural  light  of  faith,  and  the  natural  light  of  the  un- 
derstanding. 

"  By  the  natural  light  of  the  understanding,  a  person  is 
led  only  incipiently  towards  faith,  inasmuch  as  by  it,  the 
things  of  faith  may  appear  evidently  credible  on  account  of 
extrinsic  arguments,  whilst  they  are  attentively  and  dispas- 
sionately considered,  &c." 

"  What  is  the  light  of  faith  ? 

"  It  is  a  certain  supernatural  internal  light,  or  an  inward 
impression  of  God,  by  which  the  understanding  is  inclined, 
so  that  it  attends  to  the  arguments  of  credibility,  and  is  en- 
lightened so  that  it  more  readily  apprehends  the  weight  and 
evidence  of  the  arguments."     *     *     * 

That  the  delusions  of  the  church  of  Rome  are  not  superficial 
excrescences,  but  vital  and  fundamental  errors,  becomes  more 
evident  as  her  principles  are  investigated.  Whatsoever  the 
church  teaches,  is  a  material  object  of  faith,  and  must  be 
received  without  a  murmur  even  of  respectful  inquiry.  The 
church  says  so — and  let  it  suffice  that  "  Rome  has  spoken  !" 
Now,  that  there  arc  in  revelation  things,  which  from  their 
8      - 


90  DIVISION  OF  FAITH. 

very  nature  must  be  received  explicitly,  we  admit ;  and  in 
so  far  as  they  do  not  fall  within  the  province  of  reason,  and 
are  beyond  its  ken,  they  are  not  properly  matters  of  discus- 
sion, and  must  be  believed  though  they  cannot  be  under- 
stood ;  such  for  instance  are  the  doctrines  of  the  Trinity, 
and  of  the  nature  and  purposes  of  God,  &c.  But  we  are 
neither  required  to  believe  what  is  clearly  contrary  to  reason, 
nor  yet  to  shrink  from  investigations  which  evidently  fall 
within  the  legitimate  limits  of  human  understanding.  The 
Bible  never  requires  us  to  receive  the  "ipse  dixit"  of  a  fel- 
low-creature as  authoritative ;  on  the  contrary,  the  word  of 
God  encourages,  commends,  and  enjoins,  the  closest  scrutiny 
in  those  matters  of  faith  which  are  fairly  cognizable.  The 
Saviour  blames  the  Jews  for  not  "judging  of  themselves 
what  was  right."  If  he  had  taught  that  the  mere  word  of  a 
priest  was  to  be  regarded  as  sufficient  authority,  he  would 
not  have  asked  the  Jews,  in  the  language  of  reproach — 
"  Yea,  and  why  even  of  yourselves,  judge  ye  not  what  is 
right?"  It  was  Christ  who  bade  the  Jews  "search  the 
Scriptures ;"  he  was  willing  that  his  claims  to  Messiahship, 
should  be  submitted  to  that  test ;  and  is  it  not  strange,  that 
the  sect  which  claims  to  be  the  only  and  the  universal 
Christian  church,  should  shrink  from  this  ordeal,  appointed 
by  the  great  head  of  the  church,  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  him- 
self! The  Romish  Church  requires  that  all  her  doctrines 
and  decrees,  whether  contained  in  the  Bible  or  not,  whether 
contrary  to  the  letter  and  spirit  of  scripture  or  not,  whether 
properly  cognizable  by  reason  or  not,  should  be  received 
with  explicit  faith,  and  that  the  mere  fact  that  the  church 
teaches  so  and  so,  shall  be  regarded  and  received  as  suffi- 
cient evidence  of  the  truth  of  any  doctrine.  Now,  in  this 
respect,  the  Romish  church  claims  more  than  even  Christ  de- 
manded for  himself;  Jehovah  says,"  Come  now,  and  let  us  rea- 
son together;"  but  antichrist  will  have  no  reasoning ;  and  when 
the  most  preposterous  absurdities  are  avowed,  then  it  is  that 


ARTICLES  OF  FAITH.  -01 

the  thunder  of  Holy  Church's  anathemas  is  loudest.  Under 
the  section  which  treats  of  the  "  external  motives  of  credi- 
bility," it  will  be  observed  that  "  the  authority  of  the  church" 
is  mentioned  as  "  the  first  and  sv^fficient  argument  of  credi- 
bility !  I"  Then  follow  the  arguments  from  miracles  and 
prophecy ;  these  belong  to  the  church  of  Christ,  however. 
But  mark  :  "  the  truths  of  our  faith  have  been  confirmed  by 
miracles,  by  Christ,  the  apostles,  and  'preachers  down  to 
these  times."  That  Christ  and  his  apostles  ever  performed 
a  miracle  to  confirm  the  peculiar  tenets  of  the  church  of 
Rome  is,  to  say  the  least,  a  gross  delusion ;  but  that  the 
priests  have  sought  to  confirm  the  fictions  of  their  faith  by 
monkish  miracles  and  tricks  is  gravely  asserted,  and  suffi- 
ciently proved  by  many  good  men  ;  and  we  are  therefore 
disposed  to  allow  them  all  the  evidejice  from  "  miracles," 
which  is  properly  their  own.  As  to  the  arguments  from  the 
antiquity,  universality,  firmness,  &lc.,o[  their  faith,  we  shall 
attend  to  them  in  due  time.  We  will  merely  observe  in 
relation  to  the  quotation  from  Augustine,  that  although  some 
of  the  peculiarities  of  the  Man  of  Sin  were  beginning  to 
develope  themselves  in  his  day,  St.  Augustine  would  never 
have  been  a  papist  in  the  nineteenth  century. 

"  The  SANCTITY  and  purity  of  the  doctrine  and  mem- 
bers of  the  church,"  will  furnish  us  with  materials  for  a  sepa- 
rate chapter,  when  we  come  to  treat  of  "  the  Church"  more 
particularly. 


CHAPTER  XIV. 

Articles  of  Faith.     (22.) 

An  article  of  faith  is  defined  as  being  "  a  proposition  per- 
taining to  eternal  salvation,  or  a  certain  primary  truth  among 
those  things,  which  are  to  be  believed,  having  a  particular 


92  ARTICLES  OF  FAITH. 

difiicully  in  being  believed.  Thus  the  Apostle's  creed  em- 
braces twelve  articles,"  &c. 

u  *  *  *  That  Abraham  had  two  sons,  one  by  a  bond- 
woman, the  other  by  a  free  woman ;  that  by  touching  the 
bones  of  Elisha,  the  dead  man  revived,  &c.  are  not  articles 
of  faith ;  but  these  truths  are  reduced  to  one  general  article 
by  which  all  things  which  are  asserted  in  the  Holy  Scrip- 
tures are  believed  to  be  true. 

"  Secondly,  it  is  required  that  this  truth  have  a  special 
difficulty  in  being  believed;  and  hence  that  Christ  suffered, 
died,  and  was  buried,  is  one  article  of  faith  containing  three 
propositions,  of  which  the  two  latter  have  not  a  different 
difficulty  from  the  former ;  for  if  Christ  could  suffer,  he 
could  also  die  and  be  buried ;  but  that  he  rose  again  on  the 
third  day.  is  a  distinct  article,  because  it  has  a  special 
difficulty. 

"  Therefore  make  a. distinction  between  these  three  things; 
a  doctrine,  a  point  and  an  article  of  faith. 

*'A  doctrine  of  faith  is  every  revealed  truth,  or  every 
thing  that  faith  teaches. 

"  And  this  in  like  manner  is  said  of  a  point  and  an  article 
of  faith. 

"  A  point,  which  others  call  a  proposition  of  faith  is  in- 
deed a  revealed  truth,  but  a  less  important  one,  and  not  to 
be  explicitly  believed  by  all :  for  instance  that  Saul  was  the 
first  King  of  Israel. 

"  An  article  of  faith  is  a  more  important  truth,  and  per- 
taining to  eternal  salvation ;  v.  g.  The  consubstantiality  of 
the  Word  with  the  Father." 

Have  articles  of  faith  increased  in  iJie  lapse  of  time  7  (23.) 

"  From  Adam  to  the  times  of  the  Apostles,  it  is  certain 
that  they  have  increased — for  there  are  many  things,  which 
are  believed  explicitly  and  in  a  greater  number  under  the 
new  law,  v.  g.  The  incarnation,  passion,  resurrection,  sacra- 
ments, &c.  of  Christ,  which  were  not  thus  believed  under 
the  old  law." 

"  Whether  they  have  increased  as  to  their  substance  or 
only  as  to  their  explanation  is  a  question.  The  latter  is  the 
more  generally  received  opinion. 

Since  the   times  of  the  Apostles,  articles  of  faith  have 


ARTICLES  OF  FAITH.  93 

not  increased.  "  When  the  spirit  of  truth  shall  have  come, 
he  will  teach  you  all  truth;"  "therefore  new  revelations, 
which  concern  the  Catholic  faith  ought  no  more  to  be  ad- 
mitted." 

"  You  will  say  :  after  the  apostles'  times  many  truths 
were  defined  and  propounded  by  Councils  and  Popes  as  be- 
longing to  the  faith,  which  before  the  definition  were  not 
matters  of  faith ;  therefore  also,  since  the  times  of  the  apos- 
tles, articles  of  faith  have  increased. 

"  J./15.  I  deny  the  inference:  because  those  truths  had 
been  explicitly  known  and  propounded  to  the  church  by  the 
apostles  ;  therefore  the  church  in  defining  did  not  establish 
an  article  altogether  new,  but  again  propounded  it  particular- 
ly ;  yet  not  by  a  new  revelation,  but  only  declaring  what 
things  ought  to  be  believed,  and  had  been  handed  down  and 
believed  by  the  apostles." 

"  The  church  is  not  less  learned  or  intelligent  in  the  mys- 
teries of  faith  since  the  apostles'  times — '  because  as  in 
earlier  so  also  in  later  times,  the  church  is  the  ground  and 
the  pillar  of  truth,'  to  which  God  has  promised  his  assistance 
even  to  the  end  of  time. 

"  And  hence  this  remark  of  the  heretics  is  to  be  rejected, 
&c.  that  the  church  may  be  involved  in  greater  darkness, 
and  may  sometimes  dote,  or  fail  through  old  age. 

"  This  indeed  may  be  conceded,  that  the  Fathers  nearer 
the  times  of  the  apostles,  as  S.  Jerome,  Aug.  &c.  were  more 
enlightened  than  the  modern  ;  but  yet  the  same  light  is  found 
at  this  day  in  the  whole  body  of  the  church,  whilst  we  learn 
the  truths  from  their  writings  which  they  had  been  taught 
more  immediately  through  the  unction  of  the  Holy  Spirit." 

That  the  true  church  of  Christ,  consisting  of  believers  out 
of  every  kindred  and  nation  and  tongue  and  people,  will 
always  be  preserved  from  the  darkness  of  ignorance  and  the 
delusions  of  superstition,  is  a  precious  truth.  Even  in  the 
gloomiest  days,  the  true  light  shines  in  their  souls,  and 
though  darkness  cover  the  earth  and  gross  darkness  the 
people,  God's  children  always  will  have  peace  and  love  and 
joy  in  the  Holy  Ghost.  But  it  is  not  true  that  there  never 
have  been  seasons,  when  religion  has  fearfully  declined,  and 
8* 


94  ARTICLES  OF  FAITH. 

when  the  visible  church  has  been  corrupted.  It  was  so  in 
the  days  of  Elijah,  and  yet  God  had  preserved  to  himself 
7000  who  had  not  bowed  the  knee  to  Baal  nor  kissed  his 
images.  It  was  so  in  the  justly  called  "  dark  ages,"  when 
the  candle  of  the  Lord  shone  scarcely  any  where,  save 
among  the  persecuted  Waldenses  and  Albigenses  and  Cul- 
dees,  who  were  hunted  like  the  deer  of  the  forest  by  the 
merciless  armies  of  the  Pope. 

It  is  not  true  that  the  church  of  Rome  never  has  been 
corrupt,  and  it  is  equally  untrue  that  she  is  free  from  perni- 
cious error  now. 

It  is  not  true  that  the  Romish  church  is  "  the  pillar  and 
ground  of  the  truth,"  neither  is  it  true  that  the  apostle  desig- 
nated her,  when  he  spoke  of  the  church  of  the  living  God. 

It  is  not  true  that  no  new  articles  of  faith  have  been  added 
by  the  authorities  of  the  Romish  church  since  the  days  of 
the  apostles ;  and  it  is  just  as  untrue  that  the  decrees  of 
Popes  and  Councils  have  always  been  in  accordance  with 
the  faith  once  delivered  to  the  saints  by  the  apostles  of  the 
XiOrd  Jesus  Christ. 

These  are  all  points  which  will  recur  for  discussion  in  the 
course  of  the  present  work ;  meanwhile,  therefore,  we  op- 
pose a  blank  denial  to  the  bald  assertions  •  of  the  Romish 
Doctor. 

Concerning  the  Symbol  of  Faith  [or  Creed).    (24.) 

A  symbol  of  faith  is  defined  as  "  A  summary  or  collec- 
tion of  certain  articles  of  faith,  proposing  in  a  compendious 
manner  the  most  important  things  to  be  believed  by  all." 

The  advantages  to  be  derived  from  this  compendium  are, 

"  1.  That  the  faithful  might  more  easily  be  instructed. 

"  2.  That  the  unity  of  the  faith  might  more  readily  be 
preserved  throughout  the  world. 

"  3.  That  by  the  profession  of  the  creed,  the  faithful  might 
be  distinguished  from  infidels. 

"  4.  Lest  the  faith  of  the  simple  might  be  corrupted  by 
infidels. 


ARTICLES  OF  FAITH.  95 

"There  are  four  creeds,  viz. ;  the  Apostles',  the  Nicene, 
the  Constantinopolitan,  and  the  Athanasian. 

"  The  profession  of  faith,  which  Pope  Pius  IV.  prescribed 
from  the  decrees  of  the  Council  of  Trent,  and  appointed  to 
be  uttered  with  an  oath  by  all  who  are  about  to  be  promoted 
to  sacred  offices,  academical  degrees,  &c.,  has  the  nature, 
though  not  the  name  of  a  symbol." 

Concerning  the  Apostles^  Creed,    (25.) 

This  is  the  well-known  form  of  sound  words,  which  is 
familiar  to  us  all — "I  believe  in  God  the  Father  Almighty, 
Maker  of  heaven  and  earth,  and  in  Jesus  Christ  his  only 
Son  our  Lord,  who  was  conceived  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  born 
of  the  Virgin  Mary,  suffered  under  Pontius  Pilate,  was  cru- 
cified, dead  and  buried.  He  descended  into  hell ;  the  third 
day  he  rose  again  from  the  dead ;  he  ascended  into  heaven, 
and  sitteth  at  the  right  hand  of  the  Father,  whence  he  shall 
come  to  judge  the  quick  and  the  dead.  I  believe  in  the  Holy 
Ghost,  the  Holy  Catholic  Church,  the  communion  of  saints, 
the  remission  of  sins,  the  resurrection  of  the  body,  and  life 
everlasting.  Amen." 

"  Why  is  it  called  the  Apostles'  creed  ? 

"  Both  because  it  contains  the  doctrine  and  articles  preach- 
ed by  the  apostles  themselves ;  and  also  because  it  was  com- 
posed by  the  apostles  before  they  were  scattered  in  the  vari- 
ous parts  of  the  world  to  preach." 

In  the  former  part  of  this  answer  we  can  heartily  concur, 
but  the  truth  of  the  latter  assertion  is  more  than  questiona- 
ble, as  we  will  show  presently.  The  creed  itself  we  recog- 
nize as  orthodox ;  it  is  associated  with  the  first  lessons  in 
religion,  which  Protestants  are  taught  in  their  childhood,  and 
if  we  understood  it  precisely  as  the  church  of  Rome  ex- 
plains it,  there  would  be  less  ground  for  controversy  between 
us  than  there  is.  But  whilst  we  acknowledge  that  it  is  a  form 
of  sound  words,  we  must  be  permitted  to  dissent  from  the 
opinion  as  to  the  extent  of  the  obligation  of  knowing  it  by 
heart,  expressed  in  the  following  answers. 


96  ARTICLES  OF  FAITH. 

"  Is  thare  an  obligation  that  the  faithful  should  know  the 
Apostles'  creed? 

"  Yes :  because  by  divine  command  we  ought  to  believe 
the  Gospel ;  but  the  creed  contains  the  principal  heads  of  the 
Gospel :  therefore  every  one  ought  to  believe  it,  and  there- 
fore to  know  it. 

"How  great  is  the  obligation  of  knowing  the  apostles' 
creed  ? 

"  1  answer  with  S.  Charles  Borrom.,  &c.  *  Every  Chris- 
tian if  he  is  an  adult  is  bound  to  know  all  the  articles  of  the 
apostles'  creed,  under  pain  of  mortal  sin  :'  understand  as  to 
its  substance. 

"  Are  the  faithful  obliged  to  know  the  creed  even  word 
for  word  ? 

"  Yes ;  and  this  the  common  opinion  of  the  faithful  proves : 
this  obligation  has  been  introduced  either  by  the  apos- 
tles, or  by  the  custom  of  the  church  :  and  hence  it  was 
sanctioned  already  from  the  earlier  centuries  of  the  church, 
that  boys  so  soon  as  they  become  capable  of  learning  should 
thoroughly  learn  before  everything  else,  the  creed,  and  other 
mysteries  of  the  same  necessity. 

"  Malderes,  Wiggers,  Sylvius,  &c.  teach  that  although  the 
obligation  of  knowing  the  creed  word  for  word,  is  not  im- 
proper of  itself,  but  only  trifling  ;  yet  if  any  one  should  not 
know  how  to  recite  it  from  idle  negligence,  he  could  not 
easily  be  excused  from  mortal  sin :  because  such  a  one  for 
the  most  part  will  also  be  ignorant  of  the  articles  as  to  their 
substance,  and  will  be  found  grievously  negligent  in  exer- 
cising acts  of  faith,  hope,  &c. — Hence  St.  Aug.  says,  '  I 
know  not  with  what  face  he  can  call  himself  a  Christian, 
who  neglects  to  acquire  the  few  sentences  in  the  creed  and  the 
Lord's  prayer.'" 

As  to  the  creed  itself,  the  Romish  explanation  differs  very 
materially  from  the  Protestant.  Thus  in  the  fiflh  article, 
"  He  descended  into  hell,"  there  is  a  comment,  which  strikes 
us  as  rather  bold. 

"  What  is  proposed  for  belief  in  the  first  part  of  the  fifih 
article,  '  He  descended  into  the  lower  regions  V 

'■'•  Ans,  That  the  soul  of  Christ  separated  from  the  body, 


ARTICLES  OF  FAITH.  97 

descended  to  the  lower  regions,  and  there  remained  so  long 
as  his  body  was  in  the  Sepulchre. 

"  To  what  place  of  the  lower  regions  did  he  descend  1 

"  Ans.  By  the  name  of  the  lower  regions  are  meant  the 
secret  receptacles  in  which  those  souls  are  detained,  who 
have  not  obtained  celestial  happiness  :  but  these  as  the  Roman 
Catechism  teaches,  before  the  resurrection  of  Christ,  were 
three;  viz.  the  hell  of  the  damned,  purgatory  and  limbus,  in 
which  the  spirits  of  the  just  fully  cleansed  (from  sin)  were 
kept  before  Christ's  coming  to  them. 

"  These  things  being  premised,  it  is  certain  that  the  soul 
of  Christ  descended  to  the  '  Limbus  Patrum,'  and  imme- 
diately rendered  their  souls  happy ;  and  afterwards,  when 
ascending  to  heaven  took  them  with  him. 

"  It  is  probable  that  he  also  penetrated  to  the  place  of 
purgatory,  and  that  he  consoled  the  spirits  there  detained, 
and  perhaps  at  the  same  time  liberated  at  least  some  from 
(their)  pains. 

"  That  he  descended  to  the  abode  of  the  damned  is  not 
probable :  yet  they  could  feel  the  virtue  of  Christ's  descend- 

ing." 

Our  Theologian  speaks  like  a  book  upon  this  subject. 

"  It  is  certain  !  that  the  soul  of  Christ  descended  to  the 
Limbus  Patrum  &c. — 'Limbus  Patrum?'  'Limbus  Pa- 
trum !'  Where  do  you  find  any  mention  of  such  a  place  in 
the  Word  of  God? 

The  Roman  Catechism  teaches  that  "  Limbus  Patrum" 
was  one  of  the  three  abodes  of  departed  spirits — 

The  Roman  Catechism  !     Indeed  ! 

And  "  it  is  probable  that  he  also  penetrated  to  the  place 
af  purgatory  &c. 

"  Purgatory  ?"  If  I  had  read  no  other  book  but  the  Bi- 
ble, I  should  never  have  seen  the  word  in  my  life.  But  as 
the  Roman  Catechism  is  again  adduced  as  authority,  of 
course  that  settles  the  question.  What  a  blessed  thing  it  is 
that  the  Roman  Catechism  has  been  framed,  and  that  there 
is  an  infallible  church,  from  whose  decisions  there  can  be  no 
appeal ! 


98  ARTICLES  OF  FAITH. 

*'  Observe,  that  heretics  denying  the  descent  of  Christ  to  the 
lower  regions,  not  less  impiously  than  foolishly  understand 
*  hell,'  in  this  connection  for  the  grave :  for  the  burial  has 
evidently  been  expressed  in  the  fourth  article,  and  would  thus 
be  uselessly  repeated  here  in  obscure  words." 

That  the  "  Apostles'  creed,"  is  a  symbol  of  great  an- 
tiquity, cannot  be  denied ;  though  its  age  has  no  doubt  been 
overrated  by  Romish  authors.  Tertullian  and  Irenoeus  al- 
lude to  it :  and  the  whole  form  as  it  now  stands  in  the  Eng- 
lish Liturgy,  may  be  found  in  the  works  of  St.  Ambrose, 
who  flourished  in  the  third  century  ;  and  also  in  the  writings 
of  Rufinus  of  the  fourth  century.  But  the  following  con- 
siderations will  have  some  weight  in  sustaining  the  belief 
that  the  apostles  did  not  compose  any  such  creed. 

1.  Neither  St.  Luke,  nor  any  other  writer  before  the  fillh 
century,  makes  any  mention  of  an  assembly  of  the  apostles 
for  composing  a  creed. 

2.  The  fathers  of  the  first  three  centuries,  in  disputing 
against  the  heretics,  endeavour  to  prove  that  the  doctrine 
contained  in  this  symbol,  was  the  same  which  the  apostles 
taught ;  but  they  never  pretend  that  the  apostles  composed 
it.  This  they  certainly  would  have  distinctly  asserted,  if 
they  had  known  it  to  be  a  fact. 

3.  If  the  apostles  had  made  this  creed,  it  would  have 
been  the  same  in  all  churches,  and  in  all  ages ;  and  all 
authors  would  have  cited  it  in  the  same  manner.  But  they 
have  not  done  so.  In  the  second  and  third  ages  of  the 
church,  there  were  as  many  creeds  as  authors ;  and  the 
same  author  sets  down  the  creed  after  a  different  manner  in 
several  places  of  his  works,  which  is  an  evidence  that  there 
was  not  at  that  time,  any  creed  reputed  to  be  the  apostles' : 
In  the  fourth  century,  Rufinus  compares  together  the  three 
ancient  creeds  of  the  churches  of  Aquileia,  Rome,  and  the 
East,  which  differ  very  considerably,  not  only  in  tones  and 
expressions,  but  even  in  the  articles,  some  of  which  were 
omitted  in  one  or  other  of  them  ;  and  amongst  these,  "  the 


ARTICLES  OF  FAITH.  99 

descent  into  hell,"  is  one.*  As  to  the  meanjng  of  the 
phrase,  "  he  descended  into  hell,"  we  do  not  feel  under  obli- 
gation of  any  kind  to  explain  it,  as  we  do  not  acknowledge 
it  to  be  of  divine  authority.  But  lest  Romanists  should  sup- 
pose that  it  is  impossible  to  give  any  rational  and  scriptural 
exposition  of  it,  and  that  we  must  after  all  endorse  the 
Roman  Catechism,  we  will  state  what  we  suppose  to  be 
meant  by  the  phrase,  "  he  descended  into  hell." 

The  Hebrew  word,  "Sheol,"  which  is  rendered  hell, 
or  hades,  seems  originally  to  design  the  whole  region  down- 
ward from  the  surface  of  the  earth,  to  an  indefinite  and  in- 
conceivable depth.  Thus,  Job  speaking  of  the  unsearch- 
ableness  of  the  divine  perfections,  says :  "  It  is  high  as 
heaven,  what  canst  thou  do  ?  deeper  than  hell,  what  canst 
thou  know?"  and  Amos,  "though  they  dig  into  hell,  thence 
shall  mine  hand  take  them  ;  though  they  climb  into  heaven, 
thence  will  I  bring  them  down."  Now  as  the  bodies  of 
persons  dying,  are  as  it  were,  let  down  into  this  pit,  which 
becomes  the  universal  grave  of  mankind ;  therefore  to  die  is 
frequently  termed  xaTa/3aivEiv  J<g  a5ou,  or  xara^sd&ai  iig  a(5ou, 
to  descend,  or  be  brought  down  into  this  hell,  which,  as  it 
happens  to  all  men  indiscriminately,  is  promiscuously  attri- 
buted to  all  men  without  reference  to  moral  character. 
Hence  good  Jacob  says,  "I  will  go  down  unto  'hell,'  unto 
my  son,  mourning,"  (i.  e.)  "  I  will  go  down  to  *  Sheol,'  this 
common  grave  of  mankind.  In  this  way,  the  term  '  Sheol' 
was  figuratively  used  for  *  grave,'  and  so  it  is  translated  by  the 
Septuagint  in  one  passage,  Is.  xxxviii.  28.  *  Sheol'  (the  grave) 
cannot  praise  thee ;  death  cannot  celebrate  thee ;  they  that 
go  down  into  the  pit  cannot  hope  for  thy  truth."  If  then 
we  understand  "  the  descent  into  hell,"  as  implying  that  our 
Saviour  was  laid  in  the  common  receptacle  of  the  dead,  we 
are  sure  that  there  is  nothing  unscriptural  in  it;  and  the 

*  See  Barrow  on  the  creed,  and  King's  history  of  the  apostles' 
creed. 


100  ARTICLES  OF  FAITH. 

passage  in 

of  David,  "  thou  wilt  not  leave  my  soul  in  hell,"  admits  of 
this  interpretation ;  for  our  Saviour's,  soul  not  being  left  in 
hell,  and  not  seeing  corruption,  is  explained  by  Peter  as 
denoting  his  resurrection.  "  David,"  says  he,  "  foresee- 
ing THIS  SPAKE  OF  ChRISt's  RESURRECTION." 

Again,  taking  "  soul"  for  the  living  soul,  or  that  faculty 
by  which  we  live,  and  hell  for  the  state  of  death,  the  words 
"  thou  wilt  not  leave  my  soul  in  hell"  will  be  equivalent  to 
this,  "  thou  wilt  not  suffer  me  to  remain  dead,  till  my  flesh 
has  been  corrupted,"  and  this  seems  to  have  been  Paul's 
view,  for  it  is  remarkable  that  in  the  13th  of  Acts,  he  omits 
the  former  part,  "  thou  wilt  not  leave  nrty  soul  in  hell,"  and 
mentions  simply  the  latter,  "  thou  wilt  not  yield  thy  Holy 
One  to  corruption,"  thereby  implying  that  the  two  parts  of 
the  text  constituted  a  parallelism,  so  common  in  the  Hebrew 
idiom,  and  were  to  be  understood  as  synonymous,  or  expla-' 
natory  one  of  the  other.  But  then  we  are  told,  by  adopting 
this  explanation  of  the  words  "  he  descended  into  hell,"  we 
are  in  fact  only  repeating  what  was  before  stated  that  "  he 
was  dead  and  buried."     To  this  we  reply — 

1.  For  this  we  are  not  accountable — you  must  blame 
those  who  inserted  these  words. 

2.  That  to  say  our  Saviour  continued  in  the  state  of  death 
for  a  season,  does  add  something  to  the  fact  that  he  was 
dead  and  buried. 

3.  That  far  greater  inconvenience  results  from  expound- 
ing the  words  differently.  If  they  contain  a  separate  article 
of  faith,  what  are  we  to  to  think  of  the  negligence  of  those 
fathers,  Irenseus,  Tertullian,  &c.  who  are  so  much  extolled 
by  Papists,  but  who  certainly  knew  nothing  of  many  practices 
and  doctrines  which  are  now  in  vogue  among  Romanists, 
and  who  omitted  these  words  ?  And  what  are  we  to  think  of 
Paul  himself,  who  in  1  Cor.  xv.  when  declaring  the  sum 
and  substance  of  what  he  had  both  learned  and  taught  con- 


ARTICItES  OF  FAITH.  101 

cerning  the  last  grand  scenes  in  the  Saviour's  history,  says, 
"  I  delivered  unto  you  first  that  Christ  died  for  our  sins  ac- 
cording to  the  Scriptures,  and  that  he  was  buried,  and  that 
he  rose  again  the  third  day"  ?  Paul  says  nothing  here  of 
his  "  descending  into  hell." 

4.  If  we  interpret  the  word  "sheol,"  or  "  hell"  as  mean- 
ing a  separate  abode  of  departed  spirits,  whether  good  or 
bad,  we  are  involved  in  a  dilemma.  It  can  hardly  be  sup- 
posed that  Christ  descended  to  the  abode  of  lost  spirits,  for 
you  must  remember,  he  told  the  penitent  thief."  This  day 
shalt  thou  be  with  me  in  Paradise.^''  And  it  will  not  do  to 
understand  "  sheol"  as  meaning  the  "  Paradise"  or  separate 
abode  of  the  departed  spirits  of  the  just,  because  it  was  "  in 
sheol"  or  "  hades,"  that  "  Dives  lifted  up  his  eyes  being  in 
torments,"  and  besides  it  is  said  in  the  apocalypse  that 
"  death  and  hades  (sheol)  were  cast  into  the  lake  of  fire," 
and  our  Romish  friends  would  hardly  suppose  that  "Para- 
dise" was  cast  into  the  burning  lake  ! 

And  again,  this  explanation  supposes  "Paradise"  to  be 
located  in  the  lowest  depths  of  the  earth.  Now  Paul  tells  us 
that  when  he  was  carried  away  to  "  Paradise,"  he  was 
"  caught  Wjp"  not  down  "  into  the  third  heaven,"  and  that  he 
was  caught  up  fro  Paradise  and  heard,  &c.  2  Cor.  xii. 

As  for  the  wild  vagaries  about  the  Saviour's  going  to 
"Limbus  Patrum,"  and  taking  with  him  the  souls  of  the 
good  men,  who  were  therein  confined,  and  the  "  probability" 
of  his  having  visited  purgatory  and  taken  with  him  at  least 
some  of  its  inmates,  having  been  taught  to  "  refuse  profane 
and  old  wives'  fables,"  we  leave  them  just  where  we  find 
them  in  Dens'  Theology  and  the  Roman  Catechism. 

The  ninth  article  teaches — "  I  believe  the  Holy  Catholic 
church,"  and  the  question  is  asked — 

"What  do  we  profit  by  this  part  of  the  ninth  article :  *  the 
Holy  Catholic  church?' 

"  Ans.  We  believe  that   there  is  a  true  church,  which 
9 


102  ARTICLES  OF  FAITH. 

alone  is  able  to  hand  down  and  explain  the  truths  necessary 
to  salvation,  and  the  two  fountains  of  Scripture  in  which  the 
same  are  found ;  but  this  church  is  distinguished  by  its  own 
marks,  viz :  that  it  be  Owe,  Holy,  Catholic,  and  Apostolic ; 
as  the  Constantinopolitan  creed  has  it." 

"  Concerning  the  church  and  its  marks,  we  shall  treat 
hereafter. 

"  Wherefore  is  it  here  said :  I  believe  the  church,  and  not 
in  the  church  ? 

"  Ans.  This  is  plain  from  what  has  been  said  before  ;  for 
this  reason  that  to  believe  in  any  one  indicates  that  he  is 
our  ultimate  end  ;  but  this,  God  alone  is." 

Whilst  we  cordially  acknowledge  our  belief  in  the  exist- 
ence of  a  church  which  is  Holy  and  Catholic,  we  must  de- 
cline believing  that  the  Romish  church  is  either  the  one  or 
the  other.     We  neither  believe  her,  nor  do  we  believe  in  her. 

The  tenth  article,  "  the  remission  of  sins,"  which  we  also 
believe,  but  in  a  different  sense,  is  thus  explained. 

"  What  does  the  tenth  article  propose,  *  The  Remission 
of  Sins?' 

"  Ans.  We  are  taught  in  this  article,  these  truths  of  the 
faith: 

"  1.  That  no  sins  in  this  life,  however  enormous  and  mul- 
tiplied, are  unpardonable. 

"  2.  That  in  the  church,  sins  are  not  only  truly  remitted, 
but  also  that  the  power  of  remitting  sins  has  been  given  to 
the  church  through  the  sacraments  of  Baptism  and  Penance. 

"  3.  That  out  of  the  church  (see  No.  71.)  there  is  no  sal- 
vation, and  therefore  no  remission  of  sins. 

"  Observe  that  under  the  remission  of  sins,  the  remission 
of  punishments  also  ma^  be  included." 

We  believe  that  there  is  provision  made  for  the  remission 
of  the  sins  of  all,  who  come  in  humble  penitence  and  faith 
to  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  But  the  remission  of  sins,  de- 
scribed above,  we  cannot  recognize.  Many  of  the  sections 
in  this  connexion  treat  upon  topics  connected  with  the  faith, 
which  are  interesting  but  not  essential,  and  we  shall  be 
obliged  to  omit  them,  as  our  limits  will  not  permit  us  to  in- 
sert them. 


ARTICLES  OF  FAITH.  103 

The  45th  section  is  jfollovved  by  a  corollary,  from  which 
we  learn  amongst  other  things  that  it  is  unlawful  for  Roman- 
ists to  participate  in  a  Calvinistic  celebration  of  the  Lord's 
supper. 

This  provision  is  scarcely  necessary,  as  it  is  not  likely 
that  they  would  be  invited,  except  on  condition  of  their  re- 
nouncing their  connexion  with  the  Romish  church.  Farther, 
to  assist  at  the  religious  services  of  heretics,  by  singing, 
playing  the  organ,  &c.,  is  not  permitted. 

" Is  it  lawful  to  be  present  at  the  preaching  of  heretics? 

"  Ans.  This  is  forbidden  in  the  following  cases  : 

"1.  If  by  this  act,  those  present  might  be  deemed  here- 
tics. 

"  2.  If  by  this,  any  one  may  be  exposed  to  danger  of 
perversion ;  and  for  this  reason,  illiterate  common  people 
cannot  without  sin  listen  to  the  sermons  of  heretics. 

"  3.  If  any  one  by  frequenting  (their  assemblies)  should 
afford  occasion  for  scandal. 

"  4.  If  any  one  by  his  going  should  afford  honour  and 
authority  to  the  minister. 

"  5.  If  all  should  be  compelled  to  come  to  the  assemblies 
of  heretics.  This  is  plain  from  the  declaration  of  Paul  V., 
who  being  consulted  by  the  Catholics  of  England,  whether 
they  might  obey  such  an  edict  of  the  king,  replied — *  It  is 
not  permitted  you  to  do  these  things  without  detriment  to  the 
worship  of  God  and  your  own  salvation.' 

"  When,  therefore,  says  Steyaert,  there  is  liberty,  and  it  is 
the  custom  for  Catholics  and  others  to  go  to  the  preaching  or 
psalm-singing  of  such  like,  apart  from  the  fact  that  thus  they 
may  be  supposed  to  countenance  such  a  religion,  then  it  must 
be  considered,  whether  any  one  incurs  danger,  and  how 
great,  or  whether  he  occasions  scandal  by  going  to  these 
(ceremonies) ;  and  also  of  what  nature  is  the  reason  of 
going." 

The  47th  section  discusses  the  knotty  question,  whether 
there  is  faith  in  a  heretic  or  not.  And  the  conclusion  which 
is  reached  is,  that  he  tias  neither  habitual  nor  actual  faith. 
The  decree  of  St.  Thomas  is,  that  "  whoever  with  obstinacy 
disbelieves  one  article  of  faith,  has  not  the  act,  nor  the  habit 
of  faith  in  relation  to  the  remaining  articles." 


% 

104  VICES  OPPOSED  TO  THE  FAITH. 

CHAPTER  XV. 
Concerning  Vices  opposed  to  the  Faith.   (48.) 

"  What  are  the  vices  opposed  to  the  faith  1 

*'  Principally  these  two,  infidelity,  which  is  opposed  to  in- 
ternal faith,  and  blasphemy,  which  is  opposed  to  the  profes- 
sion of  faith,  of  which  hereafter. 

"  What  is  infidelity,  the  vice  opposed  to  the  faith  ? 

"  It  is  a  defective  absence  of  faith ;  and  thus  they  are 
called  infidels,  who  lack  faith  accompanied  with  the  mani- 
fest expression  of  some  defect ;  for  the  blessed,  (in  heaven) 
although  they  have  not  faith,  cannot  be  called  infidels,  be- 
cause the  absence  of  faith  in  them  respects  perfection,  not 
defect ;  but  little  children  not  baptized  are  infidels ;  for  they 
want  habitual  faith,  which  they  would  have  had,  if  (in 
Adam)  they  had  not  sinned. 

"  But  adults  not  baptized  are  not  always  infidels,  because 
through  perfect  contrition  they  can  be  justified  befbre  bap- 
tism, and  thus  possess  faith. 

*'  It  is  to  be  observed,  that  the  infidel  is  sometimes  con- 
founded with  the  unbaptized  person,  and  the  unbaplized  with 
the  infidel,  &c.  &c. 

"  How  manifold  is  infidelity  1 

"  It  is  threefold,  viz. :  purely  negative,  privative,  and 
positive,  or  contrary.  The  first  infidelity  is  also  called  in- 
voluntary ;  the  two  others,  voluntary. 

"  Infidelity  is  divided  into  paganism,  Judaism,  and  heresy, 
which  are  called  the  three  kinds  of  infidelity,  of  which  here- 
after. 

"  What  is  purely  negative  infidelity  ? 

"  It  is  the  want  of  faith  in  him  who  has  heard  nothing  of 
the  faith,  nor  been  able  to  hear  it ;  or  to  whom  the  faith  has 
certainly  not  been  sufficiently  propQsed. 

"What  is  privative  infidelity  ? 

"  It  is  the  want  of  faith  in  him,  to  whom  the  faith  has 
been  sufficiently  proposed,,  or  who  could  and  ought  have 
acquired  for  himself  the  knowledge  of  the  faith,  but  neglect- 
ed (ii). 


VICES  OPPOSED  TO  THE  FAITH.  105 

"  What  infidelity  is  called  positive,  or  contrary  ? 

"  The  want  of  faith,  with  voluntary  error  in  the  faith, 
through  assent  of  falsehood,  or  dissent  of  the  truth  ;  or  it  is 
the  want  of  faith  in  him,  who,  though  sufficiently  instructed 
concerning  the  faith,  maintains  an  error  contrary  to  the 
faith." 

The  49th  section  treats  of  the  kinds  of  infidelity  which 
are  sinful,  and  the  degrees  of  guilt  to  be  attached  to  them. 
Privative  and  positive  infidelity  are  both  sin.  Purely  nega- 
tive infidelity  is  not  sin.  Thus,  the  heathen  commit  no  sin 
in  failing  to  believe  the  gospel,  as  it  is  not  possible  that  they 
should  believe,  owing  to  their  ignorance  of  it. 

"  Is  voluntary  infidelity  the  greatest  sin  1 

"  According  to  St.  Thomas,  infidelity,  from  its  very  na- 
ture, is  a  more  grievous  sin  than  all  offences  which  can  be 
committed  against  moral  virtues  :  because  infidelity  is  more 
directly  against  God  than  sins  which  are  opposed  to  moral 
virtues.  Besides,  infidelity  also  takes  away  the  foundation 
and  root  of  justification. 

"  Yet  hatred  of  God,  which  is  opposed  to  love,  is  more 
grievous  than  infidelity,  as  St.  Thomas  teaches,  &c. 

"  Observe  1,  with  St.  Thomas,  that  a  sin  which,  from  its 
very  nature,  is  more  grievous,  can  be  less  so  from  certain 
circumstances. 

"  Observe  2,  that  a  believing  person  committing,  v.  g. 
adultery,  or  another  sin,  sins  more  grievously,  other  things 
being  equal,  than  an  infidel  committing  the  same  things, 
both  on  account  of  knowledge  of  the  truth  from  faith,  and 
on  account  of  the  sacraments  with  which  he  has  been  im- 
bued, to  which  he  offers  contempt  by  sinning. 

"  St.  Thomas  teaches  that  not  every  action  of  an  unbe- 
lieving person  is  a  sin  ,*  because  he  may  perform  some 
morally  good  works. 

*'  This  is  plain  also  from  the  condemnation  of  this  propo- 
sition, the  25th  among  Bajus — 'All  works  of  infidels  are 
sins,  and  the  virtues  of  philosophers  are  vices.' 

Concerning  the  kinds  of  infidelity,   (No.  50.) 

"  How  many  kinds  of  infidelity  are  there? 
"Under  the  new  law  there  are  three,  to  wit:  paganism^ 
9* 


106  VICES  OPPOSED  TO  THE  FAITH. 

Judaism,  and  heresy.  To  one  of  these  every  other  infi- 
delity can  be  reduced. 

"  What  is  paganism  1 

"  It  is  the  unbelief  of  those  who  profess  Christ  neither  in 
figure,  nor  in  the  manifestation  of  the  truth  ;  or  who  do  not 
acknowledge  that  any  Messiah  or  Christ  has  come,  and  do 
not  expect  that  he  will  come.  Such  are  idolaters,  atheists, 
deists,  Mahometans,  &c. 

"  What  is  Judaism  ? 

"  It  is  the  unbelief  of  those  who  confess  the  Messiah  or 
Christ  in  figure  only ;  or,  who  deny  that  Christ  has  come, 
but  hitherto  expect  that  he  will  come. 

"  What  is  heresy  ? 

"  It  is  the  unbelief  of  those  who  indeed  profess  that 
Christ  has  come  ;  but  reject  his  doctrine  as  proppsed  by  the 
church,  as  to  some  part — Such  are  Lutherans,  Calvinists,  &c. 

"  Which  kind  of  infidelity  is  the  most  grievous  sin? 

*'  I  answer  with  St.  Thomas,  by  making  a  distinction  : 
if  infidelity  be  objectively  considered,  or  with  respect  to  its 
(subject)  matter,  then  paganism  is  more  grievous  than  Ju- 
daism, and  Judaism  more  grievous  than  heresy :  because  a 
pagan  errs  in  more  things  than  a  Jew,  and  a  Jew  in  more  than 
a  heretic.  If  subjectively,  or  with  respect  of  the  obstinacy 
of  the  will,  and  of  resistance  against  the  faith,  then  the  worst 
is  heresy,  and  Judaism  (is)  commonly  more  grievous  than 
paganism  :  because  heretics  usually  have  greater  knowledge 
concerning  the  truths  of  the  faith  than  Jews,  and  Jews  than 
pagans ;  and  thus,  heresy  is  commonly  of  more  grievous 
guilt. 

"  Yet  if  the  truths  of  the  faith  had  been  equally  credibly 
proposed  to  pagans  and  Jews ;  then  paganism  would  be  a 
more  grievous  sin  than  Judaism,  and  Judaism  than  heresy." 
&c. 

Are  injidels  to  he  compelled  to  the  faith.   (51.) 

*'  Infidels  who  have  never  been  baptized  cannot  be  com- 
pelled to  embrace  the  faith.  Especially,  not  by  the  church  ; 
because  she  has  no  jurisdiction  over  unbaptized  persons,  ac- 
cording to  that  1  Cor.  v.  12. — *What,  have  I  to  judge  them 
.that  are  without  ?'     Neither  also,  by  secular  rulers,  although 


VICES  OPPOSED  TO  THE  FAITH.  107 

their  superiors :  because  ihey  have  only  political  power, 
which  regards  solely  the  public  peace  and  tranquillity. 

"  The  examples  of  Christ,  the  doctrine  and  practice  of  the 
church,  and  the  rule.  Matt.  x.  prescribed  to  the  apostles  in 
preaching,  prove  the  same  thing. 

"  Yet  it  is  to  be  observed,  that  infidels  not  baptized,  al- 
though they  cannot  be  compelled  to  the  faith,  may  yet  be 
obliged  by  their  rulers  to  observe  the  law  of  nature,  and 
thus  to  abstain  from  blasphemies  against  God,  idolatry,  &c. : 
the  reason  is,  because  right  political  order  is  founded  in  the 
observance  of  the  law  of  nature. 

"  Infidels  also,  not  subject  to  a  Christian  prince,  nnay  be 
compelled  not  to  hinder  the  preaching  of  the  faith  in  their 
parts ;  the  reason  is,  because  the  church  has  the  right  and 
power  of  preaching  the  gospel  through  the  whole  world, 
which  Christ  conceded  to  her.  Matt,  xxviii.  19,  *  Teach  all 
nations;'  and  Mark  xvi.  15,  'Preach  the  gospel  to  every 
creature.' 

"  If  therefore  the  church  be  hindered  in  this  right.  Christian 
rulers  can,  as  the  defenders  of  the  church  by  war  or  other 
means,  restrain  those  who  endeavour  to  hinder  the  preaching 
of  the  faith. 

"  According  to  Suarez,  Herinx,  &c.,  a  Catholic  ruler  can 
compel  infidels  subject  to  him,  under  pain  of  exile,  to  be 
present  at  certain  times  at  the  preaching  of  the  gospel ; 
because,  according  to  the  constitution  of  Gregory  XIII.,  Jews 
living  at  Rome  are  compelled  every  week  to  be  present  once 
at  a  sermon  concerning  things  of  the  faith. 

"  Ohj.  It  is  said,  Luke  xiv.  23.  *  Go  out  into  the  highways 
and  hedges,  and  compel  them  to  come  in ;'  therefore,  all 
infidels  may  be  compelled  to  embrace  the  Christian  faith. 

"  Ans.  I  deny  the  inference  ;  for  the  words  of  the  parable, 
according  to  S.  Gregory,  are  understood  concerning  com- 
pulsion, improperly  so  called,  which  is  done  through  preach- 
ing, persuasion,  showing  of  miracles,  &c. 

"  But  if  with  St.  Augustine  you  understand  the  words 
concerning  compulsion,  properly  so  called,  then  they  are 
understood  concerning  heretics  and  schismatics,  who  have  at 
some  time  professed  the  faith,  and  who  can  be  compelled. 

"  Baptized  infidels,  such  as  heretics  and  apos- 
tates USUALLY  ARE,  ALSO  BAPTIZED  SCHISMATICS,  MAY  BE 


i 


%^ 


108  VICES  OPPOSED  TO  THE  FAITH. 

compelled,  even  by  cobporeal  punishments,  to  return 

to  the  catholic  faith,  and  the  unity  of  the  church. 

"  The  reason  is,  because  these  by  Baptism   have 

BECOME  subject  TO  THE  CHURCH  ,*  AND  THEREFORE  THE 
church  has  jurisdiction  over  them,  and  THE  POWER 
OF  COMPELLING  THEM  THROUGH  APPOINTED  MEANS  TO 
OBEDIENCE,  AND  TO  FULFIL  THE  OBLIGATIONS  CONTRACTED 
IN  BAPTISM. 

*'  This  also  holds  good  in  those  who  have  been  baptized 
in  infancy,  or  who  have  undergone  baptism  compelled  by 
fear  or  some  necessity ;  as  the  Council  of  Trent  teaches, 
sess.  7,  can.  14,  concerning  baptism,  and  the  Council  of  To- 
ledo, 4th  can.  55. 

"  Ohj.  No  one  believes  unless  he  is  willing;  but  the  will 
cannot  be  compelled  ;  therefore,  no  one  can  be  compelled  to 
the  faith. 

"^715.  I  deny  the  inference;  for  he  is  not  compelled  to 
believe  against  his  will,  but  from  unwilling,  to  become 
willing. 

"  You  will  insist :  no  one  can  be  compelled  to  baptism, 
therefore,  &c. 

"  I  answer  with  St.  Thomas, — *  Just  as  it  belongs  to  the 
will  to  vow,  but  to  necessity  to  perform ;  so  to  receive  the 
faith  belongs  to  the  will,  but  to  keep  it  when  received  to  ne- 
cessity !  However,  it  is  not  always  expedient  for  the 
church  to  use  this  right ;  as  will  appear  from  what  is  to  be 
said  hereafter.'  " 

The  sections  which  treat  of  Heresy  and  of  the  manner  in 
which  heretics  are  to  be  punished,  speak  for  themselves. 
They  will  be  appreciated  by  every  Protestant,  and  they  are 
respectfully  and  especially  commended  to  the  attention  of 
those  liberal  and  enlightened  apologists  for  Popery,  who  tell 
us  that  Romanism*  has  changed  for  the  better.  The  preceding 
and  following  sections  prove  it  to  be  the  same  bloody,  perse- 
cuting and  cruel  religion  that  it  always  has  been.  We  bring 
no  gratuitous  or  railing  accusation  against  the  private  mem- 
bers of  the  Romish  church.  The  vast  majority  of  them  are 
probably  ignorant  of  many  of  the  vile  principles  with  which 
the  minds  of  their  priests  are  saturated  ;  but  we  cannot  help 


VICES  OPPOSED  TO  THE  FAITH.  109 

regarding  every  man,  who  has  been  trained  in  the  theological 
schools  in  which  such  tenets  are  inculcated,  and  who  has 
failed  to  renounce  them  and  the  church  which  enjoins  and 
practises  them,  as  the  foe  of  God  and  man,  and  the  sworn 
enemy  of  our  dearest  civil  and  religious  rights.  It  is  only 
expediency^  which  restrains  Holy  Church  from  attempting 
to  enforce  these  bloody  tenets  in  our  own  land,  and  in  the 
experience  of  American  citizens ! 

In  the  following  sections  it  is  distinctly  avowed,  amongst 
other  things  of  scarcely  less  atrocity,  that  "  heretics  are 

JUSTLY  PUNISHED  WITH  DEATH."  "  HeRESY  IS  NOT  TO  BE 
TRIED,  OR    PROVED,    BUT   TO    BE    EXTIRPATED,  UTlleSS  there 

should  be  reasons,  which  may  render  its  toleration  advisa- 
ble:' 

"  ff  greater  evils  would  follow  or  greater  benefits  be 
hindered,''^  then  forsooth  heretics  may  find  some  toleration 
from  Holy  Mother  Church  !  Here  is  an  open  avowal  that 
so  soon  as  the  priests  of  Rome  have  the  power,  they  will 
consummate  the  atrocities,  which  their  theology  inculcates  1 

So  soon  as  they  can  do  it,  they  are  bound  by  their  very 
principles  to  compel  baptized  infidels,  such  as  heretics, 
i.  e.  Protestants,  even  by  corporeal  punishments  to 
return  to  the  Catholic  faith,  and  the  unity  of  the  church! 

And  yet  some  of  these  very  men,  who  thirst  for  the  blood 
of  Protestants  like  ravening  wolves,  put  on  the  sheep's  cloth- 
ing of  zeal  for  liberty,  and  proclaim  their  attachment  to  its 
institutions  from  the  house  tops !  "  They  bellow  as  they'd 
burst  the  heavens,"  Our  Country !  Our  Country !  Ameri- 
can Independence  and  Liberty  for  ever !  Out  upon  such 
barefaced  hypocrites ! 

But  we  are  accosted  by  some  good  men — "Admitting  that 
the  principles  of  Popery  are  as  hideous  as  the  blackness  of 
darkness  itself,  yet  '  where  is  the  danger'  to  our  free  institu- 
tions, which  you  seem  to  apprehend  from  its  existence  in 
this  country  ?     The  people  of  the  United  States  are  too  in 


110  VICES  OPPOSED  TO  THE  FAITH. 

telligent  as  a  body  to  fall  in  love  with  the  cocked  hats  and 
cassocks  of  the  priests  and  the  crude  absurdities  of  Popery, 
and  too  enthusiastically  devoted  to  the  cause  of  civil  liberty, 
ever  to  surrender  their  freedom  to  the  tender  mercies  of  a 
few  designing  foreigners !" 

I  state  in  reply :  The  church  of  Rome  already  numbers 
in  her  fellowship  in  the  United  States,  200,000  members 
more  than  the  aggregate  of  all  the  communicants  in  the 
combined  Protestant  churches  !  She  claims  two  millions 
as  the  number  who  bow  down  to  her  images  in  this  country. 
The  Protestant  churches  contain  according  to  a  late  accurate 
estimate,  1,800,000.  In  the  aggregate  of  actual  professors, 
therefore,  we  are  according  to  her  own  statement  outnum- 
bered. 

Now,  it  is  true  there  are  millions  who  avow  some  of  the 
distinctive  principles  of  Protestantism,  who  are  not  in  imme- 
diate communion  with  any  denomination.  But  on  the  other 
hand,  there  are  not  a  few,  whose  predilections  are  in  favour 
of  Popery,  though  they  are  not  enrolled  on  the  registers  of 
Holy  Church.  And  what  is  the  character  of  the  large 
remnant  of  our  population  % 

You  will  find  many  useful  citizens  and  valuable  members 
of  society,  who  give  themselves  little  or  no  concern  about 
religion,  but  whilst  we  make  provision  for  these  more  honour- 
able exceptions,  is  it  not  true  that  the  patriotism  of  multitudes, 
who  are  living  without  God  in  the  world,  who  attach  them- 
selves to  no  place  or  form  of  worship,  and  who  care  for  none 
of  these  things,  is  very  questionable  ?  Should  any  contingen- 
cy arise,  requiring  the  exercise  of  self-denying  devotion  to 
the  country,  how  much  dependence  could  be  placed  on  them, 
if  they  were  tempted  to  surrender  some  important  principle 
by  an  appeal  to  passion  or  prejudice  ?  Read  the  history  of 
Europe  ;  and  do  you  not  find  in  repeated  instances  that  the 
power  of  the  Pope  gradually  rose  from  a  puny  embryo  to 
the  stature  and  vigour  of  a  giant  ?    First,  it  asks  an  asylum, 


VICES  OPPOSED  TO  THE  FAITH.  Ill 

and,  from  sheer  pity  for  its  imbecility,  an  asylum  is  granted; 
and  when  by  sycophancy  and  subserviency  it  has  wormed 
itself  into  places  of  trust  and  profit,  silently  and  gradually  it 
accumulates  a  powerful  influence ;  at  length  with  the  con- 
sciousness of  growing  strength,  it  begins  to  claim  immuni- 
ties, and  when  it  has  secured  them,  it  next  affects  supremacy ; 
and  when  it  has  gained  this,  instead  of  whispering  out  of  the 
dust,  it  commands  and  threatens  with  a  voice  of  thunder. 

Twenty  years  ago  the  man  who  should  have  predicted 
that  by  this  time  Popery  would  be  in  the  ascendency  in  this 
country  would  have  been  scouted  as  a  fanatic.  And  with 
its  present  power  before  our  eyes,  with  the  voice  of  history 
calling  to  us  from  every  kingdom  and  empire  on  the  conti- 
nent of  Europe,  "  Beware  of  the  Beast !"  shall  we  be  asked 
"  Where  is  the  danger  ?" 

There  is  danger  in  the  very  nature  of  the  fundamental 
principles  of  this  monstrous  system  of  superstition  and  cru- 
elty. Their  very  enormity  screens  them  by  staggering  cre- 
dulity and  giving  to  the  truest  portraiture  the  aspect  of  ex- 
aggeration. 

There  is  danger  in  the  insidious  and  insinuating  address 
of  its  crafty  and  unprincipled  priesthood,  who  are  the  sworn 
vassals  of  the  Pope. 

There  is  danger  in  the  indifference  and  supineness  of  Pro- 
testants. 

There  is  danger  in  the  good-natured  liberality  of  "  unsus- 
pecting Americans." 

There  is  danger  in  the  vast  foreign  resources  both  in  men 
and  money,  which  are  at  the  command  of  the  Holy  Fathers 
in  this  country,  and  of  which  they  know  how  to  make  use. 

There  is  danger  in  the  want  of  principle  and  patriotism 
in  many  ungodly  politicians,  who  to  carry  personal  or  party 
measures  will  conciliate  the  votes  of  Papists  at  the  expense 
of  the  constitution. 

There  is  danger  in  the  corruption  and  venality  of  most 


112  VICES  OPPOSED  TO  THE  FAITH. 

of  the  public  journals,  whose  publishers  connive  at  the  ma- 
chinations of  Popery  through  fear  of  losing  a  little  patron- 
age! 

And  there  is  clanger  in  the  present  organized  effort  to  con- 
centrate the  political  influence  of  the  Papacy  in  this  country ! 

Concerning  the  intercourse  of  the  Faithful  with 
Infidels.    (52.) 

There  is  a  threefold  intercourse  specified  under  this  head. 

"  The  first  relates  tct  those  things  which  pertain  to  their  false 
religion,  in  which  it  is  never  lawful  to  communicate  with  in- 
fidels by  performing  their  religious  services  :  for  this  would 
be  to  profess  their  sect ;  hence  it  is  lawful  neither  to  make 
churches,  altars,  sacerdotal  robes,  &c." 

"  The  second  is  in  marriage ;  and  this  intercourse  is  for- 
bidden to  the  faithful  in  this  manner,  that  if  they  attempt  to 
contract  it  with  unbaptized  persons,  the  marriage  is  null  and 
void ;  if  with  a  baptized  infidel,  it  is  valid  indeed,  but  in 
itself  unlawful." 

"  The  third  is  in  those  things,  which  relate  to  civil  and 
political  intercourse,  such  as  buying,  selling,  feasts,  &c.  in 
which  it  is  lawful  to  communicate  with  infidels,  unless  they 
are  such,  who  have  by  name  been  denounced  by  the  church 
as  (persons)  to  be  avoided.  And  although  anciently  all 
heretics  and  all  excommunicated  persons  were  to  be  avoided  ; 
yet  in  our  day  from  the  moderation  of  the  Council  of  Con- 
stance in  the  chap.  Ad  Evitanda,  it  is  commonly  taught, 
that  no  excommunicated  persons  are  to  be  avoided,  unless 
they  have  been  denounced  by  name,  or  are  notorious  trou- 
blers  of  the  clergy.  Hence  in  our  day  there  is  no  positive 
Jaw,  which  forbids  Catholics  to  communicate  with  infidels  in 
civil  affairs. 

"  Yet  from  the  law  of  nature  an  obligation  of  avoiding  here- 
tics and  excommunicated  persons  may  arise,  viz  ;  on  account 
of  the  danger  of  perversion,  or  on  account  of  the  scandal  of 
others,  or  when  intercourse  with  them  is  in  the  way  of  their 
conversion. 

"  Is  it  lawful  to  dispute  with  infidels  concerning  the  faith  ? 

"  Whoever  having  once  embraced  the  faith,  disputes  as 
though  doubting  concerning  the  truth  of  the  faith,  sins  with- 
out doubt ;  as  St.  Thomas  teaches,  &c. 


VICES  OPPOSED  TO  THE  FAITH.  113 

"  The  case  is  different  with  him,  who  has  never  embraced 
the  faith  and  begins  to  doubt ;  such  a  one  lawfully  disputes 
in  order  to  inquire  the  truth. 

"  Disputation  with  infidels  has  been  permitted  to  some,  if 
namely  the  disputants  are  learned  and  firm  in  the  faith,  and 
it  can  be  prudently  judged  that  the  discussion  will  be  profita- 
ble :  and  hence  disputation  with  the  obstinate  is  usually  un- 
lawful, unless  there  may  be  hope  that  it  will  be  profitable  to 
some  other  person,  v.  g.  on  the  part  of  the  hearers. 

"It  was  said:  It  has  been  'permitted  to  some;  be- 
cause (by  chap.  2.  concerning  heretics  in  6,)  it  has  been 
prohibited  to  the  laity  under  pain  of  excommunication  to  dis- 
pute concerning  the  faith.  The  words  are :  '  We  forbid 
that  it  be  permitted  to  any  lay  person  either  publicly  or  pri- 
vately to  dispute  concerning  the  Catholic  faith  ;  but  whoever 
shall  do  the  contrary,  shall  be  bound  in  the  knot  of  excom- 
munication.' 

"  But  according  to  Suarez,  Conink,  &c.  this  law  seems 
abrogated  by  contrary  practice,  where  there  is  a  great  con- 
course of  heretics,  as  in  Belgium,  Germany,  &c.  But  under- 
stand this  only  of  private  discussion :  for  as  Henricus  declares 
from  S.  Ignatius,  the  holy  congregation  for  propagating  the 
faith  decreed  A.  D.  1664,  that  it  was  lawful  to  no  one  to 
dispute  with  heretics  by  appointment,  except  by  special 
license  of  the  Apostolic  See,  or  unless  the  state  of  the  faith 
should  require  it,  and  there  would  be  danger  in  delay." 

Of  tolerating  the  rites  of  Infidels.    (53.) 

"  Are  the  rites  of  infidels  to  be  tolerated  ? 

"  Ans.  The  rites  of  Jews,  although  they  sin  in  exercising 
them,  can  be  tolerated  with  some  moderation  ;  because  great 
good  accrues  to  the  church  from  them,  viz :  because  we 
have  a  testimony  to  our  faith  from  enemies,  as  by  their  rites, 
those  things  which  we  believe  are  represented  to  us  figura- 
tively. 

"  It  was  said,  '  with  some  moderation  ;'  because  if  there 
be  danger  that  the  Jews  by  their  peculiar  rites  offer  scandal 
to  Christians,  the  church  can  and  ought  to  restrain  or  hin- 
der, as  shall  be  expedient :  hence  it  has  been  decreed,  (Bk. 
5.  Decret.  tit.  6.  ch.  3  and  7,)  that  it  be  not  jxirmitted  to 
10 


114  VICES  OPPOSED  TO  THE  FAITH. 

the  Jews  to  have  many  synagogues  in  one  state,  nor  to  build 
new  ones  in  many  places. 

"  The  rites  of  other  infidels,  viz.  pagans  and  heretics,  in 
themselves    (considered),   are   not   to   be    tolerated  : 

BECAUSE  THEY  ARE  SO  BAD,  THAT  ISO  TRUTH  OR  ADVAN- 
TAGE FOR  THE  GOOD  OF  THE  CHURCH  CAN  BE  THENCE 
DERIVED. 

"  Except,  however,  unless  greater  evils  would  follow,  or 
greater  benefits  be  hindered. 

"  ObJ.  I.  The  apostle  says,  Rom.  xiv.  5.  *  Let  every  man 
abound  in  his  own  sense  ;'*  therefore  liberty  of  religion  is 
to  be  left  to  every  one. 

"  I  deny  the  inference :  for  the  apostle  is  not  treating  of 
the  rites  of  religion ;  but  of  the  observance,  or  non-obser- 
vance of  the  difference  between  days  and  meats  according 
to  the  law  of  Moses,  both  of  which  could  at  that  time  be 
properly  done. 

"  ObJ.  II.  The  dilemma  of  Gamaliel,  Acts  v.  38,  where  he 
says  of  those  things,  which  the  apostles  did :  '  Let  them 
alone  :  for,  if  this  design  or  work  be  of  men,  it  will  fall  to 
nothing :  but  if  it  be  of  God,  you  are  not  able  to  destroy  it.' 

"  Ans.  I.  This  is  not  a  dilemma  of  Holy  Scripture,  but 
of  Gamaliel,  who  by  this  plausible  argument  wished  to 
deliver  the  apostles,  to  whom  he  was  favourably  disposed, 
from  present  danger. 

"  Ans.  II.  Admitting  that  the  reasoning  of  Gamaliel  is 
substantial,  there  is  a  disparity,  because  the  case  of -infidels 
is  not  doubtful  to  the  judges  of  the  church,  as  the  case  of 
the  apostles  was  to  the  Jews :  but  it  is  agreed  that  it  cer- 
tainly is  false  and  condemned ;  and  hence  it  is  not  to  be 
TRIED,  or  proved,  BUT  EXTIRPATED  ,'  unless  there  may  be 
reasons,  which  may  render  it  advisable  that  it  should  be 
tolerated,''^ 

Concerning  Heresy  in  particular.    (No.  54.) 

"  Heresy  is  a  Greek  word,  which  signifies  choice ;  be- 
cause a  heretic  chooses  by  his  own  judgment  to  believe  what 
he  wishes. 

*  The  Doway  translation  of  the  Scripture  is  unintelligible — the  true 
meaning-  is  given  in  the  Holy  Bible,  "  Let  every  man  be  fully  per- 
suaded  in  hia  own  mind." 


VICES  OPPOSED  TO  THE  FAITH.  115 

"  It  is  sometimes  taken  objectively  for  a  proposition  con- 
taining some  error  against  the  faiih ;  however,  it  is  never 
properly  taken  objectively  for  the  assent  of  the  understand- 
ing, about  such  a  proposition,  and  formal  heresy  is  usually 
meant,  concerning  which  in  the  following  (chapters.) 

"  What  is  heresy  ? 

"  It  is  an  obstinate  error  in  the  faith  of  a  person  profess- 
ing Christianity. 

"  Explain  this  definition. 

"  It  is  said  :  *  of  a  person  professing  Christianity,'  that  it 
may  be  distinguished  from  Judaism  and  Paganism. 

"  It  is  said  :  *  an  error ;'  because  heresy  is  in  an  erring 
understanding,  as  its  nearest  subject. 

"  It  is  added,  '  In  the  faith,'  because  heresy  imports  a 
corruption  of  the  faith,  and  is  an  error  concerning  those 
things,  which  belong  to  the  faith.  But  something  pertains 
to  the  faith  in  a  twofold  manner :  in  one  way,  directly  and 
principally,  as  the  articles  of  faith ;  in  the  other  way,  indi- 
rectly  and  secondarily,  as  that  corruption  of  any  article 
which  follows  from  those  things  which  are  denied ;  and 
heresy  in  the  same  way  as  faith  may  be  concerning  both. 

"  But  an  error  concerning  other  truths  or  matters  of  dis- 
cipline is  not  called  heresy. 

"It  is  subjoined,  'obstinate;'  because  heresy  imports 
choice,  or  that  some  one  knowingly  and  willingly  adheres 
to  an  error  against  the  faith  ;  and  hence,  without  obstinacy, 
it  is  not  formal  heresy,  as  St.  Augustine  says,  (epist.  16.) 
'  Without  obstinacy  I  may  indeed  err,  but  I  shall  not  be  a 
heretic' 

"  And  hence  the  distinction  of  formal  and  material  heresy, 
is  recognized :  for  material  is  an  error  in  the  faith  without 
obstinacy. 

"  How,  if  to  formal  heresy  obstinacy  is  required,  can 
heretics,  for  instance  in  Holland,  be  reputed  formal  heretics, 
when  they  out  of  ignorance  persuade  themselves  that  their 
own  sect  is  the  true  religion  ? 

"  Ans.  Although  many  among  them  labour  under  the 
ignorance  by  which  they  think  their  own  sect  to  be  the  true 
religion,  yet  this  very  ignorance  is  usually  from  an  aliena- 
tion of  mind  from  the  faith,  and  with  sufficient  obstinacy  for 
heresy ;  because  the  Roman  Catholic  church  had  come  suf- 


116  VICES  OPPOSED  TO  THE  FAITH. 

ficiently  into  their  notice,  shining  forth  by  her  own  marks 
of  credibility  and  the  incredibility  of  their  own  sect ;  from 
■which  they  can  well  enough  discriminate  that  the  Roman 
Catholic  church  is  the  true  church  of  Christ,  and  is  therefore 
to  be  heard  as  an  infallible  rule,  according  to  which  the  first 
revealing  truth  is  manifested  to  us  ;  but  this  church  they  either 
reject,  or  deny  to  be  the  only  church  of  Christ. 

"  The  question  is  proposed,  however,  concerning  many 
who  hav6  been  born  and  educated  among  heretics  or  schis- 
matics, in  how  far  they  can  be  excused  from  formal  heresy. 

"Steyaert  replies,  that  in  this  matter  it  may  generally  with 
sufficient  certainty  be  declared  that  many  such,  even  after 
they  have  in  the  mean  time  attained  to  the  use  of  reason, 
may  be  as  yet  excused :  because  either  they  hear  nothing 
about  the  Catholic  faith,  or  not  so,  that  they  are  as  yet  suf- 
ficiently capable  of  discerning  its  grounds.  Afterwards  he 
adds,  that  it  is  very  difficult  to  determine  any  thing  specially  ; 
nor  is  it  necessary  to  be  too  liberal  in  this  respect,  when  we 
consider  the  opinions  chiefly  of  the  Fathers  concerning  the 
certain  destruction  of  those  who  have  not  the  true  faith  of 
Christ." 

Concerning  the  Division  of  Heresy. 

"  How  is  heresy  divided  ? 

"  It  is  divided  into  formal  and  material  heresy,  which 
division  has  been  explained  in  the  preceding  number. 

"Formal  heresy  is  divided  into  internal  and  external, 
also  into  secret  and  manifest, 

"  Which  heresy  is  called  internal,  and  which  external  ? 

"Internal  is  that  which  lies  concealed  in  the  mind,  so  that 
it  is  betrayed  by  no  outward  sign. 

"  External  is  that  which  betrays  itself  by  outward  signs, 
from  which,  if  persons  were  present,  they  could  know  that 
such  a  one  was  a  heretic,  although  perhaps  no  one  may  be 
present  who  sees  these  signs ;  such  as,  trampling  under  foot 
the  Floly  Scripture,  images  of  Christ  and  the  saints,  done  in 
an  heretical  spirit. 

"Which  heresy  is  called  secret,  and  which  manifest? 

"  Secret  heresy  is  that  of  him  who  has  not  yet  been 
known  as  such  by  a  considerable  part  of  the  community. 


VICES  OPPOSED  TO  THE  FAITH.  117 

"  The  heresy  is  called  manifest  of  him  who  is  known  as 
a  heretic  by  a  considerable  part  of  the  community. 

"  What  are  the  punishments  of  the  crime  of  heresy? 

"Ans.  1.  Merely  internal  heresy  in  this  age  has  no 
punishment,  nor  does  it  constitute  a  reserved  case. 

"  Ans.  2.  External  heresy  has  the  annexed  greater  excom- 
munication of  an  enacted  sentence,  and  reserved  to  the  Pope. 

"  The  second  penalty  is  irregularity,  for  which  see  Tract 
concerning  Censure  &c. 

"  The  third  penalty  is  disqualification  for  public  benefice 
and  office,  &c. 

'*  The  fourth  penalty  is  privation  of  benefices  and  digni^ 
ties :  &c. 

"The  fifth  is  the  privation  of  spiritual  jurisdiction  as  well 
in  the  internal  as  in  the  external  court :  however  understand 
this  with  the  qualification  appointed  in  the  Council  of  Con- 
stance :  (See  No.  52 ;)  hence  so  long  as  they  are  not  de- 
nounced by  name,  or  do  not  themselves  recede  from  the 
church,  they  do  not  lose  jurisdiction,  and  therefore  absolve, 
dispense,  &c.  validly.     (See  Sylvius,  &c.) 

"  6.  Notorious  heretics  are  infamous  of  course,  and  are 
deprived  of  ecclesiastical  burial. 

"  7.  Their  temporal  goods  are  of  course  confiscated  :  yet 
a  declaratory  opinion  concerning  the  crime  from  the  ecclesi- 
astical judge,  ought  to  precede  the  execution  :  because  the 
cognizance  of  heresy  belongs  to  the  ecclesiastical  court. 

"  Finally  they  are  deservedly  visited  with  other  penalties, 
even  corporal,  as  exile,  imprisonment,  &c, 

"  Are  heretics  rightly  punished  with  death? 

"  St.  Thomas  answers,  (2.  2.  quest,  xi.  art.  3.  in  corp.) 
Yes,  because  forgers  of  money,  or  other  disturbers 
OF  the  state,  are  justly  punished  with  death  ; 
therefore  also  heretics,  who  are  forgers  of  the 
faith,  and  experience  being  the  witness,  grievously 

disturb  THE  STATE. 

"  It  is  confirmed  by  this  that  God  under  the  old  law  or- 
dered the  false  prophets  to  be  slain,  and  Deut.  xvii.  12,  de- 
creed that,  '  He  that  will  be  proud  and  refuse  to  obey  the 
priest — shall  die.'  See  also  chap.  x.  v.  19.  'But  he  that 
will  not  hear  his  words,  which  he  shall  speak  in  my  name, 
I  will  be  the  revenger.' 
,10* 


118  CONCERNING  BLASPHEMY. 

"The  same  is  proved  by  the  condemnation  of  the  14th 
art.  of  John  FIuss  in  the  Council  of  Constance. 

"  It  is  to  be  observed  that  persons  not  baptized  do  not  in- 
cur the  above-named  penahies,  which  have  been  appointed 
by  the  church,  because  not  subject  to  the  church ;  apostates, 
however  incur  them,  that  is,  they  who  after  Baptism  go  over 
to  the  Jews  or  pagans. 

"Are  those  who  return  from  heresy  to  be  received  by  the 
church  ? 

"  I  answer  with  S.  Thom.  quest.  11.  art.  4 ;  returning  he- 
retics are  always  to  be  received  to  penance ;  although  they 
may  have  relapsed  frequently :  both,  because  by  penance 
they  are  brought  back  into  the  way  of  salvation,  and  because 
the  church  closes  her  bosom  against  no  one  returning  to  her. 
But  they  are  not  always  to  be  restored  to  their  former 
honours,  dignities  or  offices,  neither  are  they  always  to  be 
liberated  from  all  punishment,  especially  when  they  have  re- 
lapsed into  heresy." 


CHAPTER  XVI. 

Concerning  Blasphemy.   (57.) 

"  What  is  blasphemy  1 

"  Ans.  Blasphemy  as  it  is  understood  by  the  Fathers  and 
Theologians,  is  reproachful  speech  against  God,  or  that  by 
which  J  through  means  of  reproach,  something  is  detracted 
from  the  honour  and  excellence  of  God :  and  hence  you 
will  easily  distinguish  it  from  the  sin  of  infidelity,  perjury, 
&c. 

"  It  is  said  :  Speech,  either  external  and  of  the  mouth,  or 
internal  and  of  the  heart.  Against  God,  either  against  him- 
self, or  against  his  creatures  in  so  far  as  they  belong  to  God, 
and  the  divine  holiness  and  power  shine  forth  in  them,  &;c. 
Reproachful ;  because  it  is  done  in  opposition  to  God,  against 
whom,  as  everywhere  present,  every  curse  is  a  real  insult. 

"  Observe,  that  to  constitute  blasphemy  it  is  not  required, 
that  it  proceed  from  hatred  or  indignation  against  God,  or 


CONCERNING  BLASniEMY.  119 

that  there  be  an  expressed  or  formal  intention  of  reproaching 
God ;  but  that  it  is  enough  that  the  words,  or  the  mode  of 
pronouncing  them  as  to  themselves,  may  tend  to  the  reproach 
or  dishonour  of  God. 

"  How  is  blasphemy  divided  ? 

"Aras.  It  is  divided  into  blasphemy  of  the  heart  and  of 
the  mouth.  Blasphemy  of  the  heart  is  internal  or  mental  ; 
of  the  mouth  it  is  external,  which  discloses  (itself)  externally 
through  words  or  other  signs. 

"  It  is  divided  into  immediate  and  mediate. 

"That  is  called  immediate,  which  contains  a  reproach 
directly  and  proximately  against  God  ;  mediate  is  that  which 
proximately  relates  to  the  saints  or  to  other  things,  in  so  far 
as  they  have  relation  to  God :  for  then  this  insult  is  reflected 
upon  God;  and  thus  all  blasphemy  is  against  God  either 
immediately  or  mediately. 

"  It  is  divided  into  enunciative,  defamatory,  and  impreca- 
tive.  Enunciative  h\3.sTphemy  is  committed,  either  by  affirm- 
ing something  concerning  God  which  is  repugnant  to  him, 
or  by  denying  that  which  is  consistent  for  him ;  or  by  as- 
cribing something  to  creatures,  which  properly  belongs  to 
God  alone. 

"  Defamatory  is  committed  by  affirming  any  thing  which 
truly  pertains  to  God ;  or  by  denying  that  which  is  not  con- 
sistent for  him,  but  in  a  reproachful  manner,  either  through 
contempt  or  ridicule :  for  instance,  if  any  one  should  find 
fault  with  Christ  that  he  has  suffered,  died,  &c. ;  or  should 
reproachfully  mention  the  blood  of  Christ,  his  members,  the 
sacraments-,  &c. 

^^  Imprecative  is  that,  when  any  one  wishes  or  imprecates 
evil  to  God  or  the  saints;  such  is  that  execrable  French 
blasphemy,  Mort  Dieu,  by  which  they  imprecate  death  upon 
everlasting  life. 

"  Blasphemy  is  divided  into  heretical  and  not  heretical ; 
heretical  is  that  which  contains  heresy  like  this :  *  Je  renie 
Dieu  (I  deny  God.') 

"Finally,  there  is  one  blasphemy  against  the  Father, 
another  against  the  Son,  and  another  against  the  Holy 
Ghost ;  in  so  far  as  they  are  opposed  to  the  appropriation, 
by  which  are  specially  attributed,  power  to  the  Father, 
wisdom  to  the  Son,  and  goodness  to  the  Spirit ;  thus,  Matt. 


12e  CONCERNING  BLASPHEMY. 

xii.,  that  is  called  blasphemy  against  the  Holy  Ghost,  by 
which  the  manifest  works  of  the  Holy  Spirit  are  ascribed  to 
the  devil. 

Concerning  the  sin  of  Blasphemy.     (58.) 

"To  what  virtue  is  blasphemy  repugnant? 

"  Ans.  All  blasphemy  is  repugnant  to  the  virtue  of  reli- 
gion ;  because  it  is  contrary  to  the  honour  and  reverence 
due  to  God. 

"  According  to  St.  Thomas,  all  blasphemy  of  the  mouth  is 
opposed  to  the  confession  of  faith  ;  but  not  properly  accord- 
ing to  Sylvius.  It  is  certain  that  external  heretical  blas- 
phemy is  opposed  to  the  confession  of  faith,  because  by  it 
something  repugnant  to  the  faith  is  asserted ;  if  such  a  blas- 
phemer inwardly  feels  with  obstinacy  as  he  has  spoken,  he 
will  be  a  formal  heretic. 

"Are  all  blasphemies  sins  of  the  same  kind? 

"A/is.  Although  scholastics  differ  in  theory,  yet  they 
agree  in  practice,  that  the  quality  of  the  blasphemy  is  to  be 
expressed  in  confession,  whether  it  has  proceeded  from 
hatred  or  indignation,  or  a  reproachful  spirit  against  God  or 
the  saints,  or  from  an  heretical  spirit ;  also,  whether  it  was 
immediate  or  mediate,  or  against  the  Mother  of  God,  or 
against  other  saints :  the  reason  is,  because  one  blasphemy 
may  be  distinguished  from  another,  if  not  in  kind,  at  least  in 
degree. 

"  Moreover,  all  these  things  are  usually  ascertained  by 
inquiring  what  words  were  spoken,  and  in  what  spirit,  or  on 
what  occasion ;  which  is  the  more  to  be  observed  in  prac- 
tice on  account  of  the  so  great  ambiguity  of  this  word,  to 
smear,  among  the  common  people,  so  that  not  even  the  kind 
of  sin  is  sufficiently  expressed. 

"  Farther  observe  that  they  may  sometimes  use  profane 
phrases  with  a  blasphemous  spirit,  and  blasphemous  phrases 
with  a  profane  spirit. 

"  Besides,  under  the  word,  to  swear,  the  common  people 
sometimes  include  words  which  sound  badly,  or  curses  aimed 
at  creatures,  which  in  themselves  contain  only  venial  sin : 
although  one  can  sin  mortally  from  some  other  source,  by 
reason  of  an  erroneous  conscience,  a  desire  of  injuring  a 
neighbour,  &c." 


CONCERNING  BLASPHEMY.  121 

In  the  remainder  of  this  section  the  question  of  the  great- 
ness of  the  sin  of  blasphemy  is  discussed.  It  is  a  mortal 
sin,  and  cannot  under  any  circumstances  be  venial;  it  is 
worse  than  homicide,  perjury,  &c.  Blasphemy  uttered  in  a 
joke  is  a  mortal  sin ;  "  because  God  is  too  great,  and  the 
saints  his  friends  are  too  excellent  to  be  exposed  to  our  jokes 
or  derision."  But  the  case  is  different  if  for  instance,  by  way 
of  hyperbole,  any  one  should  call  a  woman  a  goddess ;  or 
if  by  way  of  joke  or  levity  a  person  should  speak  of  the 
saints,  not  as  saints,  but  merely  as  men ;  "  as  if  any  one 
should  say  by  way  of  jest,  that  St.  Crispin  was  a  cobbler," 
he  would  sin  however  by  speaking  thus  irreverently,  but 
not  mortally,  &c. 

Blasphemy  in  its  theological  sense  is  a  sin,  which  from  its 
very  nature  can  be  committed  against  God  alone.  The  word 
is  of  Greek  origin,  and  was  anciently  used  as  equivalent  to 
"  defamation,"  and  applied  just  as  we  employ  that  word  to 
designate  an  offence  against  truth  or  due  regard  for  a  neigh- 
bour's reputation.  In  Scripture,  the  word  "  blasphemy" 
designates  "  reproachful  speech  against  God,"  and  is  never 
employed  in  an  inferior  sense.  The  word  of  God  never 
speaks  of  blasphemy  against  the  saints.  Hence  to  our  mind 
there  appears  to  be  a  taint  of  blasphemy  in  defining  the  sin 
as  one  which  can  be  committed  against  other  beings  besides 
God.  It  is  a  presumptuous  addition  to  "  the  words,  which 
the  Holy  Ghost  teaches,"  and  therefore  it  is  to  be  reprobated. 

But  one  of  the  grossest  and  most  appalling  forms  of  blas- 
phemy which  the  Devil  has  ever  invented,  is  that  which 
designates  the  Virgin  Mary,  as  the  Mother  of  God  !  Not 
content  with  this,  Romish  authors  speak  of  the  Virgin's 
Mother  Anna,  as  the  Grandmother  op  God  !  And  when 
we  shudder  at  this  horrid  impiety,  the  poor  Papist  looks  at 
us  in  amazement,  and  asks,  "  What !  Do  you  mean  to  deny 
that  Jesus  Christ  is  God?  And  was  not  Mary,  the  Mother 
of  Christ  1  And  hence  is  it  not  clear  that  she  is  the  Mother 
OF  God  ?" 


192  CONCERNING  RULES  OF  FAITH. 

I  know  that  Jesus  Christ  is  very  God  —  but  he  was  also 
very  man  ;  and  his  relation  to  his  earthly  parent  could  not 
possibly  extend  farther  than  his  human  nature.  How  can 
the  woman  Mary,  highly  favoured  as  she  was,  be  the  mother 
of  the  Eternal  God  ?  I  am  pained  in  my  very  soul  to  think 
that  rational  and  professedly  religious  men  can  be  guilty  of 
this  daring  and  outrageous  blasphemy  1 


CHAPTER  XVII. 
Concerning  Rules  of  Faith,   (59.) 

"  A  RULE  of  faith  is  here  called  some  stable  and  perma 
nent  principle,  which  applies  to  us  an  object  of  the  Catholic 
faith,  or  by  which  the  first  revealing  truth,  and  things  divine- 
ly revealed  to  us  are  manifested,  and  infallibly  known  with 
sufficient  credibility. 

"  But  there  are  five  rules  of  this  kind,  of  which  two  are 
inanimate  and  three  animate. 

*'  The  inanijnate  rules  of  faith  contain  the  truths  of  the 
Catholic  faith,  in  the  manner  of  a  deposit,  and  are  Holy 
Scripture,  and  Divine  Tradition. 

*'  The  animate  rule  of  faith  is  that  which  declares  to  us 
the  truths  which  God  has  revealed,  so  that  it  may  propose 
them  with  sufficient  authority,  to  be  believed  as  it  were  by  a 
divine  faith ;  and  it  is  threefold,  viz.  the  Church,  the  general 
Council,  and  the  Pope  determining  "  ex-cathedra."  The 
Gallicans  deny  that  concerning  the  Pope;  yet  all  admit  that 
provisionally  at  least,  we  must  abide  by  his  decree. 

"  Concerning  these  things,  we  will  tffeat  in  order,  but 
briefly:  Bellarmine,  Sylvius  in  his  Treatise  concerning  the 
Controversies  of  the  faith,  and  others  discuss  the  same  at 
large. 

Concerning  Holy  Scripture.   (60.) 

"  Holy  Scripture  is  usually  designated  by  various  names  ; 
by  way  of  eminence,  it  is  called  simply  Scripture^  also  the 


CONCERNING  RULES  OF  FAITH.  123 

Bible,  Sacred  Writ,  and  the  Testament  of  God,  also   the 
word,  &c.  of  God. 

*'  What  is  Holy  Scripture  1 

"  It  is  the  written  word  of  God,  God  inspiring  and  dic- 
tating it. 

"  The  word  of  God  is  divided  into  written,  and  unwritten, 
or  into  Holy  Scripture,  and  divine  Tradition.  Concern- 
ing Tradition,  we  shall  treat  hereafter. 

"  Has  the  Holy  Scripture  been  dictated  by  God,  not  only 
as  to  matter  and  sentences,  but  also  as  to  each  word,  letter, 
point,  &c.  ? 

^^  Ans.  Yes;  and  it  is  proved  from  2  Tim.  iii.  16.  *A11 
Scripture  divinely  inspired;'  also  from  2  Pet.  i.  21.  *For 
prophecy  came  not  by  the  will  of  man  at  any  time ;  but  the 
holy  men  of  God  spoke,  inspired  by  the  Holy  Ghost ;'  and 
Matt.  V.  18.  *Till  heaven  and  earth  pass,  one  jot  or  one 
tittle  shall  not  pass  from  the  law  till  all  be  fulfilled.' 

"  This  also  conduces  to  the  greater  dignity  and  authority 
of  Scripture :  nor  do  we  otherwise  sufficiently  understand, 
how  the  Holy  Fathers  can  testify  that  the  tongues  and  hands 
of  the  Sacred  writers,  and  the  writers  themselves  were  the 
pens  and  amanuenses  of  the  Holy  Spirit ;  also  that  each 
word,  syllable,  and  point  in  the  Scriptures  are  full  of  im- 
port. 

"  Does  it  concern  the  essence  of  Holy  Scripture,  that  it 
has  been  dictated  by  God,  as  to  single  words  ? 

"  Ans.  The  affirmative  opinion  is  the  more  common ; 
because  Holy  Scripture  is  the  word  of  God ;  but  that  which 
has  not  been  dictated  by  God,  is  not  the  word  of  God ; 
therefore  if  some  words  were  not  dictated  by  God,  they  do 
not  belong  to  Holy  Scripture. 

"  Concerning  ihis  thing  more  is  to  be  seen  in  the  censures 
and  justification  of  Lovanian,  and  Duacensian  Doctors, 
against  these  thre^  assertions  of  Lessius,  of  which  the  first 
is ;  that  in  order  that  something  be  Scripture,  it  is  not  neces- 
sary that  every  word  of  it  should  have  been  inspired  by  the 
Holy  Spirit. 

'*  The  second :  It  is  not  necessary  that  the  single  truths 
and  sentences  were  inspired  into  the  writer  himself,  imme 
diately  by  the  Holy  Spirit. 

*'  The  third  :  Any  book  (such  as  perhaps  the  second  of 


124  CONCERNING  RULES  OF  FAITH. 

Machabees,  is)  written  by  human  industry,  withoiJt  the  as- 
sistance of  the  Holy  Spirit,  is  made  Scripture,  if  the  Holy 
Spirit  afterwards  testifies  that  there  is  nothing  false  there. 

^^Ohj.I.  Therefore  our  vuIgate  is  not  Holy  Scripture; 
because  it  was  not  dictated  by  the  Holy  Spirit  as  to  single 
words. 

"  Ans.  I  admit  our  vulgate,  (i.  e.)  that  version  was  not 
dictated  as  to  single  words :  I  deny  that  it  was  not  dictated 
as  to  single  words  in  its  fountain,  or  in  the  original,  whence 
our  vulgate  has  been  translated,  and  with  which  it  is  con- 
sidered the  same. 

"  Whence  remark,  that  the  question  is  understood  con- 
cerning the  original,  not  concerning  translations  into  other 
tongues,  except  in  so  far  as  by  agreement  with  the  original, 
they  are  considered  the  same  with  it,  as  to  authority,  infalli- 
bility and  equivalence  of  truth  and  doctrine :  and  thus  our 
vulgate  is  called,  and  is  equivalently  Holy  Scripture,  because 
the  Church  in  the  Council  of  Trent.  Sess.  4.  declared  our 
vulgate  to  be  authentic. 

"  Ohj.  II.  The  diversity  of  amanuenses  does  not  make  a 
diversity  of  style,  if  the  same  one  is  dictating ;  but  the  style 
of  the  sacred  books  which  were  written  by  divers  individuals 
is  different ;  therefore  the  same  person  was  not  dictating. 

"  Ans.  I  deny  the  inference ;  because  God  in  dictating 
chose  to  accommodate  himself  to  the  mind  and  condition  of 
the  writers,  suggesting  such  words  as  were  familiar  to  each ; 
and  thus  directing  them,  as  if  they  had  written  by  his 
(mind.) 

"  Hence  Solecisms  and  other  defects  of  writing  are  not  to 
be  imputed  to  the  dictating  spirit,  but  to  the  writer ;  almost 
in  a  similar  way  as  if  a  good  writer  had  made  use  of  a 
defective  pen,  the  defect  of  the  writing  would  be  imputed  to 
the  pen,  not  to  the  writer. 

"  Obj.  III.  The  author  of  the  second  |^ok  of  Machabees, 
XV.  39,  begs  pardon,  if  he  has  not  written  the  history  with 
sufficient  dignity  and  propriety.  ('  If  I  have  done  well,  and 
as  it  becometh  the  history,  it  is  what  I  desired ;  but  if  not 
so  perfectly,  it  must  be  pardoned  me,')  and  ii.  24.,  he  con- 
fesses himself  the  abbreviator  of  Jason  the  Cyrenian.  ('  All 
such  things  as  have  been  comprised  in  five  books  by  Jason 
of  Cyrene,  we  have  attempted  to  abridge  in  one  book  j')  the 


CONCERNING  RULES  OF  FAITH.  125 

same  says,  v.  27,  that  he  had  undertaken  not  an  easy  task, 
but  a  business  full  of  watching  and  sweat,  ('  and  as  to  our- 
selves, indeed,  in  undertaking  this  work  of  abridging,  we 
have  taken  in  hand  no  easy  task,  yea,  rather  a  business  full 
of  watching  and  sweat ;')  but  all  these  things  could  not  be 
said  by  him  to  whom  all  and  every  word  had  been  divinely 
given  by  inspiration ;  therefore,  «Sz;c. 

"  Ans.  As  to  the  first  point,  the  reason  has  already  been 
given.  As  for  the  second,  nothing  is  said  to  hinder  that  the 
Holy  Spirit  should  select  some  things  from  books  written  by 
human  skill,  and  cause  them  to  be  written  down  by  some 
one  to  whom  he  may  dictate  the  single  items.  To  the  third, 
the  answer  is  given,  that  the  inspiration  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
does  not  exclude  the  labour  and  study  of  inquiry ;  for  the 
writers  were  so  moved  in  writing  that  they  moved  them- 
selves :  indeed  it  might  be  concealed  from  them,  that  they 
were  in  this  manner  moved  by  God ;  in  the  same  way  as  it 
was  concealed  from  Caiaphas,  that  he  prophesied  by  divine 
suggestion,  John  xi.  50.  *  Neither  do  you  consider  that  it  is 
expedient  for  you  that  one  man  should  die  for  the  people, 
and  that  the  whole  nation  perish  not,'  to  which  the  Evange- 
list subjoins,  51.  'And  this  he  spoke  not  of  himself;  but 
being  the  high  priest  of  that  year,  he  prophesied  that  Jesus 
should  die  for  the  nation.' 

"  Obj.  IV.  One  and  the  same  voice  of  God  the  Father, 
uttered  at  the  baptism  of  Christ,  is  related  in  different  words 
by  different  writers ;  by  Matthew  iii.  17.  '  This  is  my  be- 
loved Son,  in  whom  I  am  well  pleased,'  and  by  Mark  i.  11. 
'Thou  art  my  beloved  son,  in  thee  I  am  well  pleased,' 
therefore,  &c. 

•  "  Ans.  I  deny  the  inference :  the  reason  is,  because  that 
voice  of  the  father  is  alleged  only  in  a  relative  sense ;  he 
who  relates  the  words  of  another  is  supposed  merely  to 
relate  their  substance;  but  Holy  Scripture  is  the  peculiar 
and  immediate  word  of  God,  in  the  positive  sense,  and 
therefore  it  ought  to  be  such  as  to  single  words." 

The   divine   inspiration  of  the  Scriptures   is   a  doctrine 

which  is  dear  to  every  Christian.     We  believe  that  "  Holy 

men  of  God  spake  as  they  were  moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost," 

and  that,  thus,  the  Bible  was  prepared  by  the  direct  sugges- 

11 


126  CONCERNING  RULES  OF  FAITH. 

tion  of  God ;  and  we  know  that  it  is  a  revelation  of  his  will, 
from  evidence  which  none  of  its  adversaries  can  ever  gainsay. 
The  heavenly  sentiments  which  the  Scriptures  contain  ;  the 
spirituality  of  their  design  ;  the  majestic  simplicity  of  their 
style ;  the  artless  and  disinterested  candour  of  the  writers ; 
their  harmony  in  innumerable  instances  in  which  collusion 
was  impossible ;  the  wonderful  power  of  the  doctrines  of 
Scripture  on  the  hearts  and  consciences  of  men  of  every 
rank,  condition,  and  country;  their  astonishing  preserva- 
tion ;  the  multitude  of  miracles  wrought  to  confirm  them, 
and  the  exact  fulfilment  of  their  predictions  up  to  this  hour, 
sufficiently  prove  the  Scriptures  to  be  indeed  the  word  of  the 
living  God.  Whether  this  inspiration  is  in  the  most  abso- 
lute sense,  plenary,  or  entire,  has  been,  and  still  is  a  dis- 
puted point.  Whilst  all  evangelical  Christians  insist  upon 
the  inspiration  of  the  doctrines,  sentiments,  &c.  of  the 
Bible ;  there  are  some,  who  contend  that  the  divine  superin- 
tendence extended  only  to  them,  and  not  to  the  language  in 
which  they  are  clothed. 

Paul  affirms  that  he  and  the  other  apostles  spoke  not  "  in 
the  words,  which  man's  wisdom  teacheth,  but  which  the 
Holy  Ghost  teacheth ;"  and  a  little  reflection  will  suffice  to 
show  the  importance  of  a  proper  selection  of  these  words. 
We  know  how  easily  the-beauty  and  efficacy  of  a  discourse 
may  be  marred  by  impropriety  of  language ;  if  then,  the 
sacred  writers  had  not  been  directed  in  the  choice  of  words, 
is  it  not  certain,  as  many  of  them  were  illiterate  men,  that 
they  would  have  expressed  themselves  inaccurately,  and 
consequently  have  obscured  and  misrepresented  the  truth? 
How  then  could  our  faith  rest  securely  on  their  testimony  ? 
We  must  infer,  therefore,  that  the  words  of  Scripture  are 
from  God,  as  well  as  the  matter.  Nor  can  we  recede  from 
this  conclusion,  on  account  of  the  verbal  discrepancies,  to  be 
found  in  some  texts  of  Scripture,  which  contain  a  repetition 
of  what  is  asserted  in  other  passages,  though  it  be  expressly 


CONCERNING  RULES  OF  FAITH.  127 

stated  before  each  that  the  Lord  made  the  communications 
in  these  words.  We  must  concede  to  the  Holy  Spirit  the 
same  latitude  in  the  use  of  language  universally  claimed,  by 
men  in  similar  cases ;  and  whilst  it  is  obvious  that  as  the 
words  were  spoken  only  once,  they  could  not  be  communi- 
cated exactly  under  both  the  forms  in  which  they  now  ap- 
pear ;  yet  for  every,  useful  and  practical  purpose  the  lan- 
guage consists  of  the  identical  words  spoken  on  the  occa- 
sion. 

But  whilst  we  agree  with  the  Church  of  Rome,  in  the 
essential  points  of  her  theory  of  the  plenary  inspiration  of 
the  Scripture,  we  protest  against  all  other  rules  of  faith 
except  the  genuine  Canonical  Scriptures.  We  cannot  re- 
cognize the  Apocrypha  as  any  part  of  divine  Revelation, 
because  internal  and  external  evidence  are  both  against  it. 
The  apology  which  is  offered  for  the  second  book  of  Macha- 
bees,  appears  exceedingly  lame ;  if  the  reader  will  recur 
to  the  third  objection  which  our  author  attempts  to  refute, 
he  will  scarcely  be  convinced  by  the  "answer"  which 
follows  it,  that  Judas  Machabseus  was  inspired.  There 
is  a  weakness  and  insipidity  about  him,  which  is  utterly 
foreign  to  the  inspired  writers  ;  and  the  excuses  and  apolo- 
gies which  he  offers,  are,  in  fact,  equivalent  to  a  direct  dis- 
claimer of  inspiration.  The  special  plea  that  "  nothing  is 
said  to  hinder  that  the  Holy  Spirit  should  select  some  things 
from  books  written  by  human  skill,  and  cause  them  to  be 
written  down  by  some  one  to  whom  he  may  dictate  the  sin- 
gle items,"  is  a  fair  specimen  of  Romish  casuistry.  On  the 
same  ground,  we  can  prove  that  Caesar's  Commentaries  are 
inspired.  As  for  the  allusion  to  the  prophecy  of  Caiaphas, 
we  need  only  remark,  as  it  is  evident  the  High  Priest  was 
not  aware  of  the  meaning  which  may  properly  be  affixed  to 
his  words,  that  John  simply  records  the  fact  as  worthy  of 
note,  that  this  wicked  High  Priest  should  unconsciously  have 
uttered  so  true  a  sentiment.     God  may  verify  the  words  of 


128  CONCERNING  RULES  OF  FAITH. 

wicked  men  in  a  remarkable  manner,  but  does  that  prove 
that  Judas  Machabseus  was  inspired  ? 

Concerning  the  Division  of  Holy  Scripture.   (61.) 

The  only  point  worthy  of  special  notice  in  this  section  is 
that  which  relates  to  the  Apocrypha.  The  Scriptures  are 
divided  into  the  Old  and  New  Testament ;  and  the  books  of 
both  Testaments  are  distinguished  into  legal,  such  as  Gene- 
sis, Exodus,  and  the  four  gospels;  historical,  such  as 
Joshua,  Judges,  and  Acts  of  the  Apostles ;  doctrinal,  as 
Proverbs,  Ecclesiastes,  &c.,  and  the  Epistles  of  the  New 
Testament ;  prophetical,  as  Isaiah,  Jeremiah,  &c.,  and  the 
Apocalypse. 

*'The  books  of  Holy  Scripture  are  called  canonical, 
because  they  have  been  recorded  by  the  church  upon  a 
canon  or  catalogue  of  divine  books ;  and  also  because  they 
contain  the  model  or  rule  which  we  ought  to  follow  both  in 
faith  and  customs.  These  the  Council  of  Trent  reviews, 
sess.  4,  viz.,  of  the  Old  Testament,  45,  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment, 27,  and  so  altogether  72  ;  and  commands  them,  under 
pain  of  anathema,  to  be  held  for  divine. 

"  The  canon  of  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament  is  two- 
fold :  one  Jewish,  the  other  Christian. 

"  Among  the  sacred  books  which  the  church  recognizes 
as  such,  some  are  called  protocanonical,  and  others  deutero- 
canonical. 

"  The  former  are  those  concerning  which  there  never  has 
been  any  doubt  among  the  faithful. 

"  The  latter  are  those  concerning  which,  although  they 
are  now  recorded  on  the  canon  of  sacred  books,  yet  anciently 
it  was  doubted  whether  they  were  Holy  Scripture ;  of  this 
nature  are,  from  the  Old  Testament,  the  Book  of  Tobias, 
Judith,  the  Book  of  Wisdom,  of  Ecclesiasticus,  Baruch,  the 
Epistles  of  Jeremiah,  First  and  Second  Machabees,  fragments 
or  additions  of  Esther,  from  chap.  x.  v.  4,  to  the  end ;  and 
additions  of  Daniel,  viz.  chap.  iii. ;  the  Song  of  the  Three 
Children,  the  History  of  Susanna,  and  the  History  of  Bel  and 
the  Dragon.  From  the  New  Testament,  the  Epistle  of  Paul  to 
the  Hebrews,  Epistle  of  James,  Second  of  Peter,  Second  and 
Third  of  John,  Epistle  of  Jude  and  the  Apocalypse ;  also, 
the  last  chapter  of  St.  Mark,  from  v.  9 ;  the  history  of  the 


CONCERNING  RULES  OF  FAITH.  12^ 

bloody  sweat,  and  of  the  comforting  by  the  angel  (Luke  22)  ; 
the  history  of  the  adulterous  woman,  John  viii. ;  and  v.  7, 
chap.v.  Epist.  1  of  St.  John  :  '  For  there  are  three  who.  bear 
record  in  heaven,  the  Father,'  &c. 

"  Farther,  as  well  the  deutero  as  the  protocanonical  are  of 
equal  dignity  and  authority  among  Catholics. 

"To  the  canonical  books  are  opposed  the  apocryphal, 
which  are  so  called  because  the  church  did  not  receive  them 
into  the  canon,  because  it  could  not  find  a  well-founded  tra- 
dition concerning  them,  although  some  of  the  Fathers  some- 
times questioned  their  divinity ;  such  are  the  third  and  fourth 
Book  of  Esdras,  the  third  and  fourth  of  Machabees ;  the 
prayer  of  King  Manasseh  when  a  captive,  &c.  Among  the 
apocryphal  books  some  are  positively  apocryphal  or  repro- 
bated ;  such  are  those  which  Pope  Gelasius  condemns,  &c. ; 
others  are  negatively  apocryphal,  i.  e.,  neither  approved  as 
divine  by  the  church,  nor  reprobated. 

"  Can  an  apocryphal  book  become  canonical  ? 

"A  positively  apocryphal  book  cannot  be  made  canonical ; 
but  one  which  is  only  negatively  apocryphal  can  become 
canonical :  for  nothing  hinders  a  book  to  be  sacred,  and  the 
fact  to  be  unknown  for  some  time  in  the  church,  but  after- 
wards to  be  known ;  as  happened  concerning  the  book  of 
Judith,  Esther,  &c. 

*'  May  a  canonical  book  also  become  apocryphal  1 

"  Ans.  Yes ;  viz.,  if  either  the  notice  of  its  canonization 
perishes,  or  is  mixed  with  so  many  extraneous  additions  that 
the  divine  can  no  more  be  discerned  from  the  human.  These 
things  are  easily  perceived'  from  the  manner  in  which  some 
things  can  begin  or  cease  to  be  (matters)  of  faith,"  &c. 

The  ancient  writings  which  are  introduced  in  the  foregoing 
list  of  Old  Testament  apocrypha,  and  which  are  of  equal  dig- 
nity and  authority  among  Papists  as  the  genuine  Scriptures, 
were  never  recognized  either  by  the  Jewish  or  Christian 
church  as  constituting  any  portion  of  the  genuine  Scriptures. 
And  yet,  whoever  disputes  their  authenticity  is  "  anathema," 
according  to  the  decree  of  Holy  Mother  :  i.  e.,  cursed  in  this 
world,  and  damned  in  the  next  /  A  very  severe  sentence,  we 
think,  for  presuming  to  question  the  truth  of  stories,  some  of 
II* 


130  CONCERNING  RULES  OF  FAITH. 

which  the  earliest  fathers  of  the  Christian  church  denounced 
as  fahles.  We  are  not  surprised,  however,  at  the  zeal  of 
the  church  of  Rome  in  behalf  of  the  Apocrypha,  because 
she  depends  on  some  of  these  spurious  scriptures  for  impor- 
tant testimony,  by  which  to  sustain  a  few  of  her  corrupt 
practices.  Now,  as  she  can  ill  afford  to  lose  an  iota  of  such 
evidence,  with  our  knowledge  of  her  temper  we  do  not 
wonder  that  she  is  indignant  whenever  the  Apocrypha  is 
assailed.  Popish  anathemas  in  our  day  are  considered 
apocryphal  arguments,  and  are  calculated  to  excite  the 
mirth  rather  than  convince  the  judgment  of  all  except  the 
faithful,  and  therefore  with  the  full  knowledge  that  we  incur 
the  curse  of  Holy  Mother,  we  shall  notwithstanding  offer  our 
reasons  for  rejecting  the  Old  Testament  Apocrypha. 

1.  They  possess  no  authority  whatever,  either  internal  or 
external,  to  warrant  their  insertion  in  the  sacred  canon. 
Not  one  of  them  is  extant  in  Hebrew ;  all  of  them  are  in 
the  Greek  language,  except  the  fourth  book  of  Esdras, 
which  is  extant  only  in  Latin.  Their  authors  for  the  most 
part  were  Alexandrian  Jews,  who  wrote  subsequently  to  the 
cessation  of  the  prophetic  spirit,  though  before  the  promul- 
gation of  the  Gospel. 

2.  Not  one  of  them  professes  to  be  inspired ;  and  their 
writings  were  never  received  into  the  Jewish  canon,  and 
therefore  were  not  sanctioned  by  the  Saviour. 

3.  No  part  of  the  Apocrypha  is  at  any  time  quoted  either 
by  Christ  or  any  of  his  apostles ;  neither  does  Philo  or 
Josephus,  who  wrote  in  the  first  century,  make  any  allusion 
to  them. 

4.  The  Apocryphal  books  were  not  admitted  into  the 
canon  of  Scripture  at  all,  until  after  the  fourth  century. 
They  are  wanting  in  the  catalogue  of  inspired  writings  made 
by  Melito,  bishop  of  Sardis,  in  the  second  century ;  they  are 
not  in  Origen'a  catalogue  in  the  third  century;  and  they 
are  omitted  in  the  catalogues  of  Athanasius,  Hilary,  Cyril 


CONCERNING  RULES  OF  FAITH.  131 

of  Jerusalem,  Epiphanius,  Gregory  Nazianzen,  Amphilo- 
chius,  Jerome,  Rufinus,  and  others  of  the  fourth  century  ;  nor 
are  they  mentioned  in  the  catalogue  of  canonical  hooks  recog- 
nized by  the  council  of  Laodicea  held  in  the  same  century. 
5.  The  Apocrypha,  not\yithstanding  the  veneration  in 
which  its  books  were  held  by  the  Romish  church,  was  never 
formally  recognized  as  possessing  the  same  authority  as  the 
genuine  Scriptures,  until  the  last  council  of  Trent  at  its  fourth 
session,  with  characteristic  impudence,  presumed  to  place 
them  all  (except  the  prayer  of  Manasseh,  and  the  third  and 
fourth  books  of  Esdras,)  in  the  same  rank  with  the  inspired 
writings  of  Moses  and  the  prophets. 

.  As  for  the  epistles  and  portions  of  the  New  Testament, 
which  are  included  in  the  list  of  deuterocanonical  books, 
their  authenticity  was  sufficiently  established  in  the  early 
ages  of  the  church,  and  there  is  internal  evidence  enough  to 
convince  all  who  read  them  that  they  are  genuine.  They 
need  no  apology. 

Concerning  the  Meanings  of  Holy  Scripture.   (62.) 

"What  is  the  sense  of  Holy  Scripture? 

"  Aws.  It  is  that  signification,  which  the  words  of  Scrip- 
ture immediately,  or  mediately  signify  by  the  intentiorl  of 
the  Holy  Spirit. 

"  The  sense  is  divided  into  literal  and  mystical. 

"  Literal  is  subdivided  into  proper ,  and  improper,  or  meta- 
phorical. 

^'  Mystical  is  subdivided  into  allegorical,  anagogical,  and 
tropological,  or  moral. 

"  The  proper  literal  sense,  is  that  which  the  words  taken 
in  their  proper  meaning  immediately  signify ;  such  is  the 
sense  of  these  words,  '  thou  shalt  worship  the  Lord  thy  God  ; 
thou  shalt  not  kill,'  &c.  in  which  no  figure,  or  metaphor,  is 
to  be  sought. 

"  The  improper  literal,  or  the  metaphorical  sense,  is  that 
which  is  immediately  signified  by  words  improperly,  or 
figuratively  taken ;  such  as  is  the  meaning  in  this  sentence 
of  Matt.  V.  29.     '  If  thine  eye  offends  thee,  pluck  it  out,' 


132  CONCERNING  RULES  OF  FAITH. 

6z;c.  where  eye  is  not  taken  properly  for  the  organ  of  the 
body,  but  figuratively  for  a  thing  as  necessary  and  accept- 
able as  the  eye  is. 

"  It  is  the  same,  when  an  arm  is  attributed  to  God ;  for 
by  it  is  not  meant  some  corporeal  member,  but  metaphori- 
cally divine  virtue  and  power,  also,  when  Christ  is  called  a 
lamb,  vine,  &c.  these  things  ought  to  be  taken  metaphorical- 
ly ;  and  generally  words  are  to  be  understood  metaphorical- 
ly, when  a  false,  impious,  or  absurd  sense  would  follow  from 
them  if  properly  taken. 

"  The  mystical  sense  is  then  defined  to  be  that,  *  which  is 
denoted  over  and  above  the  things  signified  by  the  words ;' 
thus  this  sentence,  Ex.  xii.  46.  *  You  shall  not  break  a 
bone  thereof,'  was  spoken  literally  of  the  paschal  lambs,  and 
rwystically  of  Christ,  as  appears  from  John  xix.  36. 

"  Farther,  the  mystical  sense  is  threefold,  viz.,  the  first  is 
allegorical,  when  the  things  signified  by  the  words,  inti- 
mate something  pertaining  to  the  church  militant,  and  the 
instruction  of  the  faith.  An  example  is  afforded,  Gal.  iv.  in 
the  two  sons  of  Abraham,  Ishmael  born  of  the  bond-woman, 
and  Isaac  of  the  free-woman,  who  prefigured  the  Old  and 
New  Covenant. 

"  The  second,  the  anagogical  (sense)  is  that,  when  the 
things  signified  by  the  words  import  something  pertaining  to 
the  church  triumphant,  and  is  referred  to  hope;  thus  the 
entrance  of  the  Israelites  into  Palestine,  after  various  afflic- 
tions, and  conflicts,  signified  that  through  many  tribulations 
we  must  enter  the  kingdom  of  heaven. 

"  The  third,  the  tropological,  or  moral  (sense)  is,  when 
actions  are  the  signs  of  those  things,  which  we  ought  to  do ; 
thus  from  the  command,  Deut.  xxv.  4;  'thou  shalt  not 
muzzle  the  ox  that  treadeth  out  thy  corn  on  the  floor,'  the 
apostle  proves,  1  Cor.  ix.  11,  that  support  is  due  to  the 
preachers  of  the  gospel  from  those  to  whom  they  proclaim 
it.  '  If  we  have  sown  unto  you  spiritual  things,  is  it  a  great 
matter  if  we  reap  your  carnal  things,'  and  v.  14.  *The 
Lord  ordained  that  they  who  preach  the  gospel  should  live 
of  the  gospel,'  &c. 

"  This  one  word  Jerusalem  embraces  these  four  mean- 
iTigs  :  for  in  the  literal  sense,  it  signifies  the  well-known 
metropolis  of  Palestine ;  allegorically,  it  signifies  the  church 


CONCERNING  RULES  OF  FAITH.  133 

militant ;  tropologically,  or  morally,  the  soul  of  a  just  man  ; 
and  anagogicalhj,  the  church  triumphant." 

All  Scripture  has  a  literal ;  but  not  every  Scripture  has  a 
mystical  sense. 

"  Besides  the  already  named  senses  of  Sacred  Scripture, 
is  there  not  another,  which  is  called  the  accommodatory  ?* 

"  Ans.  The  accommodatory  sense  is,  that  which  is  neither 
immediately  signified  by  the  words,  nor  mediately  by  the 
things  designated  in  the  words,  but  which  is  applied,  or 
accommodated  to  signify  something  else,  v.  g.  by  the 
preacher:  and  hence,  it  is  not  properly  the  sense  of  Sacred 
ScrifDture,  as  it  was  not  intended  by  the  Holy  Spirit. 

"  The  custom  of  the  church  proves,  that  the  use  of  the 
accommodatory  sense  is  la.wful;  the  church  accommo- 
dates very  many  things  from  the  book  of  Wisdom,  to  the 
blessed  Virgin,  and  various  other  things  to  other  Saints ; 
indeecl,  even  Christ  himself.  Matt.  xxv.  7.  applies  the  words 
of  Isaiah,  xxix.  13,  to  the  Scribes  and  Pharisees  of  his  own 
time ;  *  this  people  honours  me  with  their  lips,'  (although) 
spoken  to  the  Jews  in  the  time  of  Isaiah. 

"  This  use  in  honourable  things  for  a  good  object  has  been 
permitted,  even  to  private  individuals ;  hence,  the  so  frequent 
use  of  it  among  the  Holy  Fathers,  and  pious  preachers. 
Nor  is  it  doubtful,  that  the  Holy  Spirit  sometimes  has  sug- 
gested similar  meanings  .to  readers,  so  that  on  this  account, 
St.  Augustine  calls  them  the  meanings  of  Sacred  Scripture. 

"  Yet  observe,  that  many  frequently  abuse  the  words,  or 
sentences  of  Holy  Scripture,  when  they  accommodate  them 
in  common  discourse,  or  otherwise,  to  profane  things,  jests, 
&;c. ;  for,  this,  sanctity  and  the  reverence  due  to  the  word  of 
,God  forbid." 

To  the  "  accommodatory"  system  of  interpretation,  when 
properly,  judiciously,  and  scripturally  exercised,  there  can 
certainly  be  no  objection.  It  frequently  happens  that  a  pas- 
sage of  Scripture  is  peculiarly  applicable  to  circumstances, 
&c.,  different  in  many  respects  from  those  under  which  it 
was  originally  given,  but  yet  there  is  some  great  leading 

*  I'am  obliged  to  coin  an  English  word,  corresponding  to  the  Latin, 
accommodatitius,  which  is  a  monkish  fabrication.  , 


IS4  CONCERNING  RULES  OF  FAITH. 

feature,  which  is  the  same  in  both  instances,  and  therefore 
the  application  may  be  correctly  made  to  either.  When- 
ever the  abstract  principle,  or  truth,  contained  in  the  Scripture, 
is  applicable  to  present  circumstances,  there  can  be  no  reason- 
able objection  to  the  system  of  accommodation.  But  we  must 
protest  against  the  accommodatory  meaning  in  the  sense 
and  latitude,  in  which  it  is  employed  by  the  Church  of  Rome. 
To  mention  one  abuse  out  of  many ;  the  whole  Psalter,  or 
book  of  Psalms,  has  actually  been  accommodated  by  one  of 
her  Cardinals,  to  the  worship  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  by  sub- 
stituting the  words  Mother  of  God,  Virgin,  Lady,  &c.,  for 
the  name  of  Jehovah,  and  otherwise  corrupting  the  Sacred 
Text. 

The  following  is  an  extract : 

"  Here  beginneth  the  Psalter  of  the  blessed  Virgin,  made 
by  the  Seraphical  doctor,  St.  Bonaventure,  bishop  of  Alban, 
and  Cardinal  of  the  Holy  Church  of  Rome.* 

"  Blessed  is  the  man  that  understandeth  thy  name,  O  Vir- 
gin Mary,  thy  grace  shall  comfort  his  soul.  Thou  shalt 
bring  forth  in  him  the  most  plentiful  fruit  of  justice,  &c. 

"  Why  do  our  enemies  fret  and  imagine  vaiii  things 
against  us  ?  let  thy  right  hand  defend  us,  O  Mother  of  God, 
terribly  confounding  and  destroying  them  as  a  sword.  Come 
unto  her,  all  ye  that  labour,  and  are  troubled,  and  she  will 
give  rest  unto  your  souls,  &c. 

"  When  I  called  to  thee,  thou  heardest,  O  my  lady,  and 
out  of  thy  high  throne,  thou  didst  vouchsafe  to  think  of  me, 
&c.  Blessed  be  thou,  O  lady,  for  ever,  and  thy  majesty, 
for  ever  dear. 

"  Preserve  me,  O  lady,  for  in  thee  have  I  put  my  trust,  &c. 

"  Blessed  be  thy  breasts,  which,  with  thy  deifying  npilk, 
did  nourish  the  Saviour,  &c. 

"  I  will  love  thee,  O  lady  of  heaven  and  earth ;  I  will 
call  upon  thy  name  among  the  nations,  &c.  All  ye  clois- 
terers honour  her,  for  she  is  your  helper,  and  special  advo- 
cate. 

*  Canonized  by  Pope  Sixtus,  in  1482,  and  now  worshipped  as  a 
Saint  ^ 


CONCERNING  RULES  OF  FAITH.  135 

"  The  wicked  man  said,  &c.  Let  him  depart  from  his 
evil  purpose ;  O  Mother  of  God,  turn  the  countenance  of 
God  towards  us ;  compel  him  to  be  merciful  unto  sinners, 
&c. 

"  My  heart  is  inditing  a  good  matter,  O  lady,  &c. 

"  Clap  your  hands,  all  ye  people,  &c.  For  she  is  the 
gate  of  life,  the  door  of  Salvation,  the  reconciler  of  our  life, 
the  hope  of  the  penitent,  the  comfort  of  the  sorrowful,  the 
blessed  peace  of  hearts  and  Salvation. 

"  Have  mercy  upon  me,  O  lady,  have  mercy  upon  me ; 
for  thou  art  the  light,  and  hope  of  all  that  put  their  trust  in 
thee. 

"  The  Lord  said  unto  our  lady,  Sit  here,  my  mother,  on 
my  right  hand,  &c. 

"  In  the  passing  of  my  soul  out  of  this  world,  come  and 
meet  it,  O  lady,  and  receive  it,  &c.  Be  to  it  a  ladder  to  the 
kingdom  of  heaven,  and  a  right  way  to  the  paradise  of  God 
&c. 

"  Except  our  lady  shall  build  the  house  of  our  heart,  the 
building  thereof  shall  not  continue,"  &c.,  &€.* 

How  any  creature  out  of  hell  could  ever  have  dared  to 
utter  such  horrid  blasphemies,  is  a  mystery  to  me ! 

Concerning  the  Obscurity  of  Sacred  Scripture, 

"  Is  Holy  Scripture  obscure? 

"  It  is  agreed  against  the  heretics,  that  Holy  Scripture  in 
various  passages  is  obscure. 

"  It  is  proved  from  Acts,  viii.,  where  Philip  asks  the 
Eunuch  who  was  reading  Isaiah,  v.  30.  *  Thinkest  thou 
that  thou  understandest  what  thou  readest  ?'  and  he  says,  v. 
31.  *And  how  can  I,  unless  some  one  show  mel'  also, 
from  2  Ep.  of  Pet.  iii.  16.,  where  speaking  of  the  Epistles 
of  Paul,  he  says:  'In  which  are  some  things  hard  to  be 
understood.' 

"  It  is  proved,  also,  from  the  unanimous  consent  of  the 
Holy  Fathers :  and  more  than  that,  the  very  dissensions  of 
heretics  clearly  show  it ;  for  why,  if  Scripture  is  every- 
where clear,  as  they  say,  do  they  themselves  differ  among 
themselves,  and  assemble  Synods  in  order  to  determine  con- 

*  See  Fox's  Acts,  and  Mon.  p.  185,  folio. 


136  CONCERNING  RULES  OF  FAITH. 

troversies  ?  Why  do  the  Lutherans  understand  Scripture  in 
one  way,  and  the  Calvinists  in  another  1 

"  Wherefore  is  the  sense  of  Scripture  often  obscure  ? 

"  In  the  first  place,  that  obscurity  arises  partly  from  the 
mysteries  which  are  there  contained,  and  surpass  human 
apprehension,  partly  from  phrases  peculiar  to  that  language 
in  which  the  sacred  books  were  written,  partly  from  figura- 
tive expressions,  and  partly  from  sentences  apparently  con- 
tradictory. 

"  But  neither  were  reasons  wanting  why  it  should  be  pro- 
posed in  an  obscure  manner. 

"  First  indeed  to  rebuke  our  pride,  inasmuch  as  from  this 
we  are  compelled  to  confess  our  ignorance,  and  to  ask  wis- 
dom from  God. 

"  Secondly.  For  the  majesty  and  reverence  of  sacred  Scrip- 
ture ;  for  those  things  which  are  easily  investigated  for  the 
most  part  become  contemptible. 

"  Thirdly.  *  In  order  that  a  studious  mind  may  be  both 
more  usefully  exercised  in  investigating,  and  more  abundantly 
rejoiced  in  finding  them,'  says  St.  Augustine;  for  those 
things  which  have  been  obtained  by  labour  and  in  a  long 
time,  are  loved  more,  and  remain  more  permanently. 

"  Fourthly.  That  mysteries  may  be  hidden  from  the  deri- 
sion of  infidels." 

One  of  the  most  common  devices  which  the  church  of 
Rome  has  employed  to  hinder  the  circulation  and  study  of 
the  Scriptures,  is  developed  in  this  section.  "  The  Scriptures 
are  obscure,  and  are  not  to  be  understood  by  the  common 
people."  That  there  are  some  passages  which  are  less 
easily  understood  than  others,  is  freely  admitted,  but  the 
texts  which  present  any  real  difficulty  are  comparatively  few 
and  far  between.  The  argument  which  is  based  upon  the 
case  of  the  eunuch,  whom  Philip  found  reading  Isaiah,  is 
contemptible.  Was  it  any  wonder  that  the  eunuch,  whose 
acquaintance  with  revelation  was  so  slender  and  recent, 
should  be  at  a  loss  to  understand  the  prophecies  which 
related  to  a  Saviour  of  whom  he  had  never  heard?  At 
all  events,  if  the  Scriptures  had  been  in  an  unknown  tongue, 


CONCERNING  RULES  OF  FAITH.  137 

he   could   not   have   read    them.     In  relation  to  the  other 
passage  from  2  Peter  iii.  16,  we  would  remark  : 

1.  The  Apostle  Peter  does  not  say  iv  aj^,  but  ^v  oig,  not 
in  which  Epistles  of  Paul  (as  Peter  Dens  has  it),  but  in 
which  things  (points  or  doctrines  mentioned  before),  "  many 
things  are  hard  to  be  understood."  If  the  Epistles  of  Paul 
had  been  intended,  then  the  Greek  relative  would  have  been 
in  the  feminine,  as  the  noun  'E'KKJToXr)  is  feminine ;  but  the 
relative  is  in  the  neuter,  o»g,  plainly  showing  that  it  refers  to 
the  word  toutwv,  which  immediately  precedes  it ;  indeed,  the 
word  "Epistles"  is  not  mentioned,  though  Peter. is  evidently 
alluding  to  them  in  the  preceding  verse. 

2.  Whilst  it  is  admitted  that  some  points  are  in  them- 
selves hard  to  be  understood,  we  distinctly  affirm  that  all 
things  necessary  to  salvation  are  sufficiently  expressed  and 
plainly  revealed. 

3.  Those  things  which  are  at  all  obscure. in  Paul's  Epis- 
tles, are  perspicuously  explained  in  other  parts  of  Scripture. 

4.  The  apostle  does  not  say  that  these  things  are  hard  to 
be  understood,  simply  and  to  all  men,  but  to  the  "  ignorant 
and  unstable,  who  wrest  other  Scriptures  to  their  own  de- 
struction ;"  and,  by  the  way,  the  church  of  Rome  is  paying 
a  poor  compliment  to  her  children  by  citing  this  text  as  a 
reason  for  withholding  the  Scriptures  from  them. 

5.  And  even  supposing  that  the  Scriptures  are  hard  to  be 
understood,  and  that  they  are  wrested  by  some  to  their  own 
damnation,  how  does  it  follow  that  they  are  no  guide  at  all, 
or  even  an  uncertain  one  ? 

May  it  not  just  as  well  be  said  that  Christ  was  not  an  in- 
fallible guide,  because  he  spoke  parables,  and  many  of  his 
words  were  wrested  by  the  Jews  to  their  destruction  ?  For 
instance,  when  he  spoke  of  destroying  the  temple,  and 
building  it  in  three  days,  John  ii.  19. — or  when  he  said  he 
was  the  Son  of  God,  Matt.  xxvi.  64,  65,  upon  which  they 
12 


138  CONCERNING  RULES  OF  FAITH. 

cried  out  he  had  spoken  blasphemy,  and  they  needed  no 
farther  witness,  &c. 

Concerning  the  reading  of  Sacred  Scripture. 

"  Is  the  reading  of  Sacred  Scripture  necessary  or  com- 
nianded  to  all  ? 

"  Ans.  That  it  is  not  necessary  or  commanded  to  all,  is 
plain  from  the  practice  and  doctrine  of  the  universal  church  ; 
for  which  reason,  in  the  Bull  unigenitus,  the  70th  proposi- 
tion concerning  this  thing  was  condemned :  '  It  is  useful  and 
necessary  at  every  time  and  place,  and  for  every  kind  of 
people  to  study  and  learn  the  spirit,  piety,  and  mysteries  of 
Sacred  Scriptures.'  To  this  add  the  80th,  81st,  82d,  83d, 
84th,  and  85th  propositions,  condemned  in  the  same  bull. 

*'  It  is  farther  proved,. thus :  it  is  the  duty  of  some  in  the 
church  to  teach ;  it  is  the  duty  of  others  to  seek  knowledge 
of  the  law  from  the  mouth  of  the  priests,  almost  in  the  same 
way  as,  in  civil  affairs,  it  is  not  the  duty  of  all  to  investigate 
the  laws,  adjudge  controversies,  &c. 

"This  is  confirmed:  because  St.  Augustine,  Book  1, 
concerning  Christian  doctrine,  chap,  xxxix.  reports  that 
certain  churches,  during  two  centuries  and  more,  subsisted 
without  the  Scriptures;  add  to  this  that  many  of  the  faithful 
do  not  know  how  to  read,  to  whom  it  is  not  convenient  either, 
to  have  any  one  who  might  read  before  them. 

*'  Besides,  the  Sacred  Scripture  was  not  read  in  the  church, 
except  in  Latin,  Hebrew,  or  Greek,  until  the  fourth  century, 
and  in  Spain,  only  in  Latin,  until  the  sixth  century ;  and  in 
England  until  the  seventh  century,  as  Bede  attests ;  and 
Harney  shows  that  our  ancestors  had  no  Bibles  rendered 
into  the  vulgar  tongue,  in  the  first  eight  centuries  after 
Christianity  was  planted  here. 

"  But  if  the  fathers  had  judged  the  promiscuous  reading 
of  Sacred  Scripture  to  be  necessary,  as  Quesnel  and  the 
other  heretics  boisterously  assert,  undoubtedly  they  would 
have  translated  it  into  the  vulgar  tongue. 

"  But  the  study  of  Sacred  Scripture  is,  by  reason  of  their 
office  and  station,  necessary  to  the  priests  and  rulers  of  the 
church,  on  whom  the  labour  of  teaching  and  arguing  is  in- 
cumbent, according  to  that  which  is  said.  Matt.  ii.  7.  '  The 
lips  of  the  priest  shall  keep  knowledge,  and  they  shall  seek 


CONCERNING  RULES  OF  FAITH.  139 

the  law  at  his  mouth  ;'  and  therefore  John  Henry,  Archbishop 
of  Mechlin,  in  his  decree  of  March  12,  1762,  justly  resolved 
that  no  one  should  hereafter  be  admitted  by  him  to  sacred 
orders,  unless  he  has  diligently  perused  the  principal  books 
of  Sacred  Scripture. 

"  Is  the  reading  of  Sacred  Scripture  permitted  to  all  per- 
sons? 

"Aw5.  The  church  does  not  forbid  by  any  decree,  the 
reading  of  Sacred  Scripture,  even  to  the  laity,  in  the  Hebrew, 
Greek,  or  Latin  language. 

"  Of  course,  however,  this  must  be  abstained  from,  if  this 
reading,  through  defect  of  capacity,  or  disposition  of  the 
mind,  would  be  of  bad  tendency ;  as  it  was  in  regard  to 
those  of  whom  Peter  speaks,  2  Ep.  iii.  16.,  '  which  the  un- 
learned and  unstable  wrest  to  their  own  destruction.' 

"  The  church  does  not  absolutely  forbid  the  reading  of 
Sacred  Scripture  in  the  vernacular  tongue  to  the  laity,  or  to 
persons  of  any  condition,  whatsoever ;  but  it  does  not  per- 
mit it  except  with  great  caution. 

"  This  discipline  of  the  church  which  had  already  been 
received  by  custom  in  particular  churches,  was  established 
for  the  whole  church,  by  the  fourth  rule  of  the  index, 
towards  the  close  of  the  Council  of  Trent,  in  these  words : 

"'As  it  is  manifest  by  experience,  if  Holy  Bibles  in  the 
vulgar  tongue  are  everywhere  indiscriminately  permitted, 
more  injury  than  advantage  would  accrue,  on  account  of  the 
temerity  of  people,  let  it  abide  in  this  point  by  the  judgment 
of  the  bishop,  or  inquisitor :  that  with  the  advice  of  the 
priest,  or  confessor,  the  reading  of  Bibles  in  the  vulgar 
tongue,  translated  by  Catholic  authors,  may  be  conceded  to 
those,  who  they  know  can  derive  no  injury,  but  an  increase 
of  faith  and  piety  from  such  reading:  which  permission 
they  must  have  in  writing.  But  whoever  shall  presume 
without  such  permission  to  have,  or  to  read  them,  cannot 
obtain  absolution  of  his  sins,  unless  the  Bibles  be  first  re- 
turned to  the  ordinary.  But  regulars  may  neither  pur- 
chase, nor  read  them,  except  by  permission  obtained  from 
their  Prelates.' 

"  Moreover,  if  you  except  certain  points,  such  as  (those) 
are  relating  to  the  obtaining  of  permission  in  writing,  the 
returning  of  the  Bibles  previous  to   absolution,  and  to  be 


140  CONCERNING  RULES  OF.  FAITH. 

made  to  the  ordinary,  the  observance  of  this  law  is  strenu- 
ously urged  by  the  bishops  of  Catholic  Belgium ;  as  may 
be  seen  in  Harney:  and  as  for  this  Diocese,  See  Synod. 
Dioeces.  ii.  lit.  i.  ch.  8,  &c. 

"  IndeedJ  according  to  Steyaert,  this  law  has  been  receiv- 
ed, and  hitherto  kept  (with  some  variation,  on  account  of  the 
prevailing  spirit  of  some  regions)  in  by  far  the  greatest  part 
of  the  Catholic  world ;  indeed,  in  the  whole  purely  Catholic 
world :    more    indulgence   has   been   granted,    only 

WHEN  IT  WAS  NECESSARY  TO  LIVE  AMONG  HERETICS. 

"  Observe  that  according  to  the  rule  stated  (above),  the 
power  of  granting  permission  to  read  the  Sacred  Scripture 
in  the  vernacular  tongue,  belongs  to  the  bishop,  or  inquisi- 
tor, not  to  the  priest,  or  confessors,  unless  this  power  has 
been  conceded  to  them. 

"  The  prohibition  of  keeping,  and  reading  vernacular 
Bibles,  includes  the  parts  of  the  Old,  as  well  as  of  the  New 
Testament,  which  custom  does  not  except ;  but  some  of  the 
psalms  are  excepted  by  custom,  the  canticles,  and  the  pas- 
sion of  the  Lord  inserted  in  prayer  books.  The  custom  has 
likewise  obtained  in  many  places,  that  the  epistles,  and  gos- 
pels, may  be  read,  which  are  to  be  sung  during  the  year  in 
the  mass;  also,  the  history  of  the  Old  and  New  Testa- 
ment. 

"  Sylvius  teaches  in  various  explanations,  under  the  word 
Bibles,  that  pastors,  preachers,  and  others,  who  are  pre- 
paring for  the  office  of  priest,  or  preacher,  may  make  use 
of  Scripture  in  the  vernacular  language :  because  this  per- 
mission has  been  conceded  to  them,  by  the  very  fact  that 
they  are  designed  for  such  office ;  and  certainly  it  has  been 
conceded  by  the  Council  of  Trent,  sess.  xxii.  ch.  8.,  where 
it  enjoins  that  the  Sacred  Oracles  be  frequently  explained  in 
the  vernacular  tongue,  during  the  solemnities  of  the  mass, 
or  the  celebration  of  the  divine  offices.  This  explanation 
of  Sylvius,  common  custom  approves  and  confirms. 

"  He  adds,  however,  that  it  is  not  equally  agreed,  con- 
cerning priests,  who  are  preparing  for  the  office,  either  of 
priest  or  preacher,  and  much  less  concerning  laymen,  well 
skilled  in  Latin. 

"  The  Quesnellites  object :  this  prohibition  is  unjust ;  bo- 
cause  a  thing,  good  and  useful  in  itself,  is  not  a  matter  of 


CONCERNING  RULES  OF  FAITH.  141 

prohibition;  but  Sacred  Scripture  is  a  thing  in  itself  good 
and  useful,  to  be  taught,  argued,  &c.,  as  is  said,  2  Tim.  iii., 
therefore,  &c. 

"I  answer  by  distinguishing  the  assumption  of  the  proof; 
I  admit  the  assertion,  that  a  thi-ng  good  and  useful  in  itself 
cannot  be  matter  of  prohibition  on  its  own  account ;  but  I 
deny  the  assertion,  that  it  cannot  be  matter  of  prohibition 
through  contingency,  on  account  of  circumstances,  persons, 
effects,  &c.  For  instance;  communion  under  both  kinds, 
although  in  itself  it  is  excellent,  is  still  forbidden  to  the 
laity :  thus,  also,  articles  of  food  in  themselves  good  are 
wisely  denied  to  those,  to  whom  by  reason  of  infirmity,  or 
weakness,  they  would  be  hurtful,  or  dangerous. 

"  But  you  will  reply  :  although  some  persons  may  abuse 
food,  or  drink,  as  for  instance,  wine,  the  use  of  these  things 
cannot  therefore  be  forbidden,  therefore,  &c. 

"  1.  A?is.  I  admit  the  antecedent,  when  understood  of  a 
law  prohibiting  universally;  because  they  are  of  universally 
necessary  use,  or  simply  useful :  although  even  in  these 
things,  in  order  to  obviate  the  abuse,  a  certain  moderation 
in  the  use  may  be  prescribed. 

"  2.  Ans.  1  deny  the  inference :  there  is  a  disparity,  be- 
cause Sacred  Scripture  has  not  been  ordained,  that  any  one 
may  of  himself  make  use  of  it  like  meat  and  drink ;  inas- 
much as  the  use  of  these  things  cannot  be  supplied  from 
another  source,  whilst  the  reading  of  Sacred  Scripture  is 
supplied  more  usefully,  and  without  danger  of  detriment,, 
through  the  instruction  of  pastors,  &c.,  from  whose  mouth 
the  people  ought  to  seek  the  law  of  God.  Whence,  observe, 
that  Sacred  Scripture  is  a  Testament,  pertaining,  indeed,  to 
all,  as  to  the  matter,  but  not  as  to  the  reading  of  the  Testa- 
ment. 

"  3.  Ans.  It  has  already  been  stated  above,  that  the  read- 
ing of  Sacred  Scripture  is  not  simply  prohibited  ;  but  in 
taking  away  the  abuse  the  church  moderates  its  use,  leaving 
it  to  the  discretion  of  superiors,  (which  cannot  thus  be  done 
in  the  use  of  wine),  who  can  judge  to  whom  this  use  or 
reading  may  be  good  and  useful. 

"  Obj.  11.    St.  Chrysostom,  Hom.  9,  Epist.  to  Col.,  speaks 
thus :  "  Hear,  I  beseech  you,  ye  laymen  ;  all  of  you  get 
Bibles  for  yourselves,  as  medicine  for  the  soul ;'  and  Hom. 
12* 


142  CONCERNING  RULES  OF  FAITH. 

3,  concerning  Lazarus,  he  says,  the  reading  of  Sacred 
Scripture  is  necessary  to  salvation.  Likewise,  St.  Jeronne 
exhorted  women  also,  Paula,  Eustochia,  &c.,  to  read  the 
Scripture;  therefore.  Sacred  Scripture  is  to  be  read  by  all, 
even  in  the  vernacular  tongue. 

"  I  answer  by  denying  the  inference :  in  the  first  place, 
those  Fathers  do  not  say  that  Sacred  Scripture  is  to  be  read 
in  a  language  that  is  not  sacred ;  but  those  wonnen  to  whonn 
St.  Jerome  speaks,  were  well  versed  in  the  Latin  tongue. 

"  It  must  be  said  that  in  this  point  the  discipline  of  the 
church  has  been  changed,  just  as  communion  under  both 
kinds  and  daily  communion  have  been  changed.  For  formerly 
the  faithful,  more  submissive  to  their  pastors,  humbly  and 
faithfully  derived  the  sense  of  Scripture  from  them  without 
danger  of  perverse  translations ;  but  now,  through  the  ex- 
ample of  the  heretics,  the  lust  of  dissenting  from  the  pastors 
has  arisen ;  and  it  is  manifest  from  experience  that  by  the 

PROMISCUOUS  READING  OF  THE  SaCRED  ScRIPTURE,  MEN 
ARE  MADE  MORE  PROUD,  MORE  DISCONTENTED,  AND  UNI- 
VERSALLY MORE  CONCEITED.  As  for  that  which  is  objected 
out  of  the  Holy  Fathers,  —  when  they  wished  to  inculcate 
any  thing  as  proper  and  useful  in  their  own  time,  they  occa- 
sionally used  words,  by  which  not  only  advantage,  but  also 
absolute  necessity  at  first  appearance  was  indicated  ,*  but  that 
they  did  not  think  the  reading  of  the  Holy  Scripture  to  be 
necessary  for  all,  is  sufficiently  gathered  from  other  passages  : 
and  thus  St.  Chrysostom  himself,  Hom.  21.  on  Genesis,  says, 
that  the  Scriptures  are  not  to  be  searched  by  all ;  and  St. 
Jerome,  writing  to  Paulinus,  complains,  that  all  men  are 
presuming  to  read  and  interpret  Sacred  Scripture." 

We  have  sometimes  known  the  advocates  of  Romanism 
boldly  deny  that  their  church  forbids  the  laity  to  read  the 
Scriptures ;  and  in  the  foregoing  section  it  will  be  observed 
that  notwithstanding  all  the  special  pleading  in  favour  of 
withholding  the  word  of  God  from  the  common  people,  it  is 
expressly  stated,  "  The  church  does  not  absolutely  forbid  the 
reading  of  Sacred  Scripture  in  the  vernacular  tongue  to  the 
laity,  or  to  persons  of  any  condition  whatsoever,  but  it  does 
not  permit  it  except  with  great  caution."    The  decree  of  the 


CONCEI^NING  RULES  OF  FAITH.  143 

Council  of  Trent,  an  infallible  oecumenical  con^vention  of 
Romish  doctors  and  bishops,  is  very  explicit  in  its  conditional 
prohibitions,  but  even  there  it  is  not  absolute,  as  the  Bishop  or 
Inquisitor  may  permit  the  laity  to  read  the  Bible  whenever 
it  is  likely  to  do  no  harm.  It  is  perfectly  manifest,  however, 
that  the  Romish  Church  is  the  deadly  enemy  of  the  general 
distribution  and  investigation  of  the  Scriptures.  Her  priests 
hate  the  Bible ;  and  we  are  not  surprised  at  the  rancour  with 
which  they  assail  the  Protestant's  Rule  of  Faith.  By  their 
own  confession.  Popery  cannot  be  sustained  by  Scripture ; 
they  must  prop  up  their  system  by  the  pillars  of  tradition, 
or  it  crumbles  into  dust.  But  the  golden  age  of  Romanism 
is  for  ever  gone!  Thanks  to  the  "example  of  heretics," 
there  are  many  in  the  communion  of  the  Romish  Church 
who  claim  the  right  of  searching  the  Scriptures  for  them- 
selves. Those  were  palmy  days  "  when  the  faithful,  more 
submissive  to  their  pastors,  humbly  and  faithfully  derived 
the  sense  of  Scripture  from  them  ;"  then,  like  dutiful  cliildren, 
the  faithful  received  all  as  gospel  which  the  Holy  Fathers 
told  them,  and  piously  asked  forgiveness  and  did  penance 
whenever  their  ghostly  counsellors  detected  them  exercising 
themselves  in  things  that  were  beyond  the  apprehension  of 
the  laity  1  Oh  !  how  the  bowels  of  Holy  Mother  yearn  for 
such  a  revival  of  religion;  how  the  Holy  Fathers  sigh, 
•when  they  are  compelled  to  afford  more  license  to  the  circu- 
lation of  the  Sacred  Scriptures  than  is  consistent  with  the 
dignity  and  true  prosperity  of  Holy  Church  !  And  yet,  far 
be  it  from  those  holy  men  absolutely  to  forbid  the  laity  to 
read  the  Bible.  Any  one  of  the  faithful  may  possess  a  copy 
of  the  Scriptures  in  Latin  or  Greek,  and  he  may  have  the 
Old  Testament  in  Hebrew,  too,  provided  he  does  not  under- 
stand those  languages,  because  then  the  word  of  God  can  do 
him  no  harm ;  it  will  not  make  him  proud,  or  discon- 
tented, or  CONCEITED,  if  hc  cannot  discern  one  word  from 
another,  but  it  will  tend  rather  to  augment  his  veneration 


144  CONCERNING  KULES  OF  FAITH. 

for  the  sacred  mysteries  of  Scripture.  The  faithful  who 
have  never  learned  their  alphabet,  are  also  at  liberty  to  pur- 
chase Bibles  in  the  vernacular  tongue,  especially  such  as  the 
priest  or  bishop  has  blessed ;  and  no  doubt  they  will  find 
them  quite  as  efficacious  in  driving  away  the  devil  as  a  pot 
of  "  holy  water." 

But  now,  in  all  seriousness,  what  are  we  to  think  of  the 
Church  whose  priests  are  taught  that  the  promiscuous  read- 
ing of  the  Scriptures  renders  men  universally  more  proud, 
DISCONTENTED,  and  CONCEITED  !  That  it  makes  them  dis- 
contented with  popery,  we  can  readily  believe ;  that  it  causes 
them  to  turn  even  with  contempt  from  its  absurdities,  we 
do  not  doubt ;  and  this  very  fact  furnishes  us  with  one 
of  our  strongest  arguments.  Popery  can  not  stand  before 
the  light  of  Scripture;  it  shrinks  from  God's  testimony 
abashed  and  confounded.  The  priests  well  know  that  the 
word  of  God  is  their  most  uncompromising  enemy.  It  spe- 
cifies the  corruptions  of  their  church  by  the  voice  of  pro- 
phecy;  it  reprobates  many  of  her  peculiar  dogmas  by 
name,  and  brands  her  with  the  marks  of  apostasy !  Its 
very  silence  condemns  her  forms  and  ceremonies,  by  proving 
that  they  are  mere  human  inventions ;  whilst  the  purity, 
peace,  and  love,  which  beam  on  every  page  of  the  sacred 
volume,  rebuke  the  lewdness  and  cruelty  for  which  she  is 
notorious.  But  it  is  a  foul  slander  on  the  sacred  oracles  to 
assert  that  their  perusal  can  be  pernicious.  If  the  theology 
of  Rome  is  true,  then  the  inference  is  irresistible,  that  the  Bible 
must  be  a  bad  book.  If  it  uniformly  produces  injurious 
results  in  exact  proportion  to  the  extent  of  its  circulation, 
we  repeat,  it  must  be  a  bad  book,  and  it  is  blasphemy  to 
assert  that  God  is  its  author.   He  cannot  be  the  author  of  evil. 

The  opposition  of  the  Church  of  Rome  to  the  Scriptures, 
proves  that  her  cause  is  desperate.  "  Every  one  that  doeth 
evil,  hateth  the  light,  neither  cometh  to  the  light,  lest  his. 
deeds  should  be  reproved."     But  without  farther  introduc- 


CONCERNING  RULES  OF  FAITH.  145 

tion,  let  us  briefly  state,  why  the  Protestant  Churches  believe 
it  proper,  that  the  Scriptures  should  be  translated  into  every 
language  on  earth,  for  the  edification  of  all  people. 

1.  If  all  Christians  are  under  obligation,  according  to  their 
capacity,  to  "  search  the  Scriptures,"  and  by  them  to  test 
the  doctrines  of  their  teachers,  then  the  Scriptures  ought 
necessarily  to  be  translated  into  the  vulgar  tongues,  that  the 
people  may  be  enabled  to  do  this.  But  the  first  is  the  direct 
command  of  God.  When  the  Jews  would  not  believe  Christ, 
he  bade  them,  "  search  the  Scriptures,"  &c.  John  v.  39. 
And  in  Acts,  xvii.  11.,  the  Bereans  are  commended  in  these 
words :  "  these  were  more  noble  than  those  in  Thessalonica, 
in  that  they  received  the  word  with  all  readiness  of  mind, 
and  searched  the  Scriptures  daily,  whether  those  things  were 
so."  Therefore  it  is  right  that  the  Scriptures  should  be 
translated  into  the  vulgar  tongue. 

2.  Jehovah  himself,  when  he  gave  a  law  to  the  Jews,  pro- 
mulgated it  in  their  common  language ;  and  both  the  Old 
and  New  Testaments  were  delivered  in  tongues  that  were 
most  familiar  in  those  times,  respectively,  to  the  church ; 
therefore,  from  this  fact,  it  is  also  evident  that  for  the  gen- 
eral use  and  benefit  of  the  common  people,  the  Scriptures 
may  and  ought  to  be  translated  into  the  languages,  which 
are  most  familiar  to  them. 

3.  If  the  Holy  Scriptures  were  lawfully  and  necessarily 
translated  into  Latin,  for  the  use  of  the  Latin  Church,  then 
by  parity  of  reason  they  ought  to  be  translated  into  other 
tongues ;  unless  it  can  be  proved  that  the  Scriptures  were 
more  necessary  to  the  Latin,  than  to  other  churches.  Now 
that  they  were  thus  lawfully  translated  into  Latin  for  the 
purposes  stated,  our  adversaries  will  not  deny.  Therefore 
it  is  right  that  they  should  be  rendered  into  every  other  lan- 
guage. 

4.  If  we  lock  up  the  Scripture  in  unknown  languages,  we 
frustrate  the  very  end  for  which  God  designed  it.     He  has 


146  CONCERNING  RULES  OF  FAITH. 

given  it  to  us  as  a  revelation  of  his  will,  that  by  hearing 
reading,  understanding,  believing,  and  obeying  it,  we  may 
be  saved.  "  For  whatsoever  things  were  written  aforetime 
were  written  for  our  learning ;  that  we  through  patience  and 
comfort  of  the  Scriptures  might  have  hope.'*  Rom.  xv.  4. 
But  how  are  we  to  learn  these  things  and  thus  through 
patience  and  comfort  of  the  Scripture  have  hope,'  unless 
they  are  translated  into  a  language  which  we. understand? 

5.  If  it  be  wanton  cruelty  to  deny  any  one  bodily  food 
and  sustenance,  it  is  still  worse  to  deprive  people  of  the  food 
and  nourishment  of  their  souls.  Now  as  the  Holy  Spirit 
frequently  declares  the  Scripture  to  be  the  '  word  of  life,' 
and  compares  it  to  "milk,"  and  "strong  meat,"  the  ora- 
cles of  God  should  be  translated  into  a  language,  which  the 
unlearned  may  understand,  because  otherwise  they  are  de- 
prived of  this  spiritual  nourishment.  The  Romish  Church 
is.guiltyof  the  utmost  cruelty  and  sacrilege  in  thus  starving 
the  souls,  whom  she  professes  to  feed. 

6.  It  is  wicked  to  deprive  the  Christian  Soldier  of  his 
spiritual  weapons ;  he  needs  them  at  all  times  and  every- 
where. But  the  Holy  Scriptures  are  part,  of  the  whole 
armour  of  God.  "  Take  the  sword  of  the  Spirit,  which  is 
the  word  of  God."  Eph.  vi.  17.  "  For  the  word  of  God  is 
quick  and  powerful,  and  sharper  than  any  two-edged  sword, 
&c."  Heb.  iv.  12.  Now  common  Christians  are  deprived 
of  this  great  spiritual  weapon,  if  the  word  of  God  is  given 
to  them  in  a  language  which  they  cannot  understand. 

7.  The  Scriptures  are  compared  to  a  candle  or  burning 
torch,  set  up  by  God  for  the  very  purpose  of  enlightening 
all  men  in  the  way  of  truth  and  salvation ;  hence  David 
says,  "  thy  word  is  a  light  to  my  feet,  and  a  lamp  to  my 
path."  But  in  order  that  every  believer  may  be  enabled  by 
it  to  direct  his  steps,  it  must  be  translated,  otherwise  this 
lighted  candle  is  put  under  a  bushel. 

Besides  all  this,  the  testimony  of  the  Primitive  Church  is 


CONCERNING  RULES  OF  FAITH.  147 

On  our  side  in  this  controversy.  This,  Peter  Dens  and  the 
priests  both  know  and  feel ;  hence  their  attempts  to  explain 
away  the  plain  and  unequivocal  language  of  the  fathers. 
Origen  of  the  third  century,  though  his  father  was  a  lay- 
man, knew  the  Scriptures  from  a  child.  We  learn  from 
Eusebius  (Eccles.  Hist.  Bk.  vi.  ch.  2.)  that  his  father  Leo- 
nidas  daily  assigned  him  a  portion  of  them,  which  he  was 
to  commit  to  memory ;  and  he  must  have  been  a  child  at 
this  time,  for  he  was  only  seventeen  years  old,  when  his 
father  suffered  martyrdom.  Origen  himself  thus  writes: 
**  We  beseech  you  not  to  content  yourselves  to  hear  the 
word  of  God  when  read  in  the  church,  but  to  apply  your- 
selves to  it  at  home,  and  to  meditate  upon  it  day  and  night. 
Christ  has  commanded  us  to  meditate  in  the  law  of  the 
Lord,  when  we  walk  by  the  way,  and  when  we  sit  in  our 
houses,  when  we  lie  down,  and  when  we  rise  up."*  The 
sentence  from  Chrysostom,  is  only  half  quoted  by  Peter 
Dens  ,*  let  us  help  him  to  the  latter  clause :  "  Hear,  I  be- 
seech you,  O  all  ye  laymen,  provide  yourselves  with  the 
Bible,  that  medicine  of  the  soul ;  or  if  you  have  nothing 

ELSE,    YET    AT    LEAST    GET    THE     NeW   TESTAMENT,    THE 

Apostles,  the  Acts,  and  the  GospELs.f  Chrysostom 
says  also,  "  the  reading  of  the  Scriptures  is  more  necessary 
for  laymen  than  for  monks.":}:  Again  he  says,  "  the  people 
ought  as  soon  as  they  come  home  from  the  church,  to  turn 
over  the  holy  books,  and  to  call  their  wives  and  children 
together  to  the  conference  of  those  things  which  are  said."§ 
Jerome,  we  are  told  on  the  testimony  of  Hosius  a  Romish 
author,  translated  the  Scriptures  into  the  Dalmatian,  as  well 
as  the  Latin  tongue.  Socrates,  the  Ecclesiastical  Historian, 
Bk.  iv.  chap.  33.  informs  us,  that  Ulphila,  a  Gothish  bishop, 
present  at  the  Nicene  Council,  translated  the  Bible  into  the 
native  language  of  his  country.     Now  what  are  we  to  think 

*  Horn.  9,  in  Levit.  t  Horn.  9,  in  Col. 

t  Cora.  Matt.  horn.  2.  §  Com.  Matt.  horn.  5. 


148  CONCERNING  RULES  OF  FAITH. 

of  the  honesty  of  the  men  who  tell  us  that  the  primitive 
fathers  reprobated  the  reading  of  the  Scriptures  by  the  com- 
mon people  !  It  is  well  known  also,  that  the  Old  Testament 
was  translated  from  Hebrew  into  Greek,  before  our  Saviour's 
time.  This  was  done  for  the  special  benefit  of  the  Alex- 
andrian Jews,  who  had  forgotten  their  own  language.  This 
translation  is  familiarly  known  by  the  name  of  the  Septua- 
gint,  and  was  used  by  Christ  and  his  apostles,  being  then 
most  extensively  circulated. 

In  conclusion,  we  will  notice  an  objection  which  is  not 
unfrequently  made,  and  upon  which  our  adversaries  in  this 
controversy  have  laid  great  stress.  They  ask  us  :  "  If  the 
main  reason  for  translating  the  Bible  is  that  the  people  may 
understand  it,  how  comes  it  that  there  is  so  great  a  difference 
of  opinion  among  Protestant  Ministers  and  people,  and 
whence  the  necessity  of  these  numerous  comments  and  ex- 
positions, which  in  many  respects  vary  so  much  one  from 
another  ?" 

"We  answer:  Admitting  that  the  common  people  do  not 
understand  all  things  contained  in  the  Scripture,  they  may 
and  do  understand  many.  The  Bible  is  a  spiritual  store- 
house, in  which  there  is  food  accommodated  to  all  ages  and 
constitutions.  Here  we  have  "  milk  for  babes,"  and  "  strong 
meat  for  them  that  are  of  full  age."  Heb.  v.  13. 

The  simplicity  of  many  precious  Scriptures  condescends 
to  our  weakness ;  the  difficulty  of  other  passages  awakens 
industry  and  research.  Here  we  have  perspicuity  to  regu- 
late our  duty,  and  obscurity  to  teach  us  humility.  We  bless 
the  goodness  of  God  in  its  clear  discoveries,  and  we  adore 
his  wisdom  in  its  veiled  mysteries.  The  plain  instructions 
of  God's  blessed  word,  we  will  with  the  help  of  divine  grace 
improve  to  our  salvation,  and  as  for  "  the  things  that  am 
hard  to  be  understood,"  if  we  cannot  unfold  them  to  our 
own  satisfaction  and  the  edification  of  others,  we  will  at 
least  endeavour  by  God's  grace  not  to  wrest  them  to  our 


con(5erning  rules  of  faith.  149 

own  destruction.  Whilst  we  freely  admit  that  there  are 
doctrines  of  Scripture,  which  are  variously  stated  and  un- 
derstood by  different  denominations  of  the  church  of  Christ, 
we  would  remind  the  advocates  of  popery  that  in  the  essen- 
tial doctrines  of  revelation,  we  are  agreed ;  the  truths,  which 
involve  salvation  we  hold  in  unity  of  faith ;  and  as  to  minor 
points  we  can  agree  to  differ. 

In  reading  the  Scriptures,  we  wish  to  be  governed  by  the 
following  rules,  which  we  respectfully  commend  to  the  atten- 
tion of  all  men,  whether  Protestants  or  Papists. 

1.  We  would  read  prayerfully.  Christ's  precept  and 
promise  enjoin  this  duty.  *'  Ask  and  it  shall  be  given  you," 
&c. .  And  again,  James  (i.  5.)  says,  If  any  man  lack  wis- 
dom, let  him  ask  of  God,  &c. 

2.  We  would  submit  our  understandings  to  the  wisdom 
of  God,  and  subject  all  our  thoughts  to  the  obedience  of 
Christ.  "  If  any  man  seemeth  to  be  wise  in  this  world,  let 
him  become  a  fool  that  he  may  be  wise ;  for  the  wisdom  of 
the  world  is  foolishness  with  God."  1  Cor.  iii.  18,  19 ;  and 
also.  Matt.  xi.  25. 

3.  We  would  lay  aside  all  prejudice,  self-interest  or 
undue  prepossession  in  favour  of  any  system,  or  the  notions 
of  any  man,  or  set  of  nien.  We  would  beware  of  this 
leaven  of  the  Pharisees.    Matt,  xvi.  6.  12. 

4.  We  would  search  the  Scriptures  with  faith,  and  in 
the  exercise  of  true  repentance  for  all  our  sins ; .  knowing 
that  in  the  impenitent  and  profane,  the  Spirit  of  Christ  will 
not  dwell.  2  Tim.  iii,  7.  "  They  are  ever  learning,  and 
never  able  to  come  to  the  knowledge  of  the  truth." 

5.  We  would  be  filed  with  love  for  the  truth,  and  a  sin- 
cere desire  to  know  and  embrace  it,  not  through  mere  for- 
mality or  custom,  remembering  Paul's  words,  "  because  they 
received  not  the  knowledge  of  the  truth,  God  shall  send 
them  strong  delusions  that  they  should  believe  a  lie." 

6.  We  would  take  up  our  Bibles  with  a  sincere  desire  not 

13 


150  CONCERNING  RULES  OF  FAITH. 

only  to  know,  hut  also  to  do  the  will  of  God ;  never  for- 
getting that  the  great  end  of  Scripture  is  practical ;  teaching 
us,  that "  denying  all  ungodliness  and  worldly  lusts,  we  should 
live  soberly,  righteously,  and  godly  in  this  present  world." 
Tit.  ii.  12. 

Certain  questions  concerning  Sacred  Scripture. 
(No.  65.) 

"  Have  any  sacred  books  been  lost  ? 

"  Ans.  Yes,  this  is  plain  from  the  Bible  itself  in  which 
various  books  are  cited,  which  are  unknown  to  us,  &c.,  &c. 

"  Are  any  autographs  extant  to  this  time,  or  primitive  and 
original  manuscripts  of  Sacred  Scripture  ? 

^^  Ans.  No.  Nor  is  this  necessary,  as  the  copies  of  tran- 
scripts approved  by  the  church  are  of  the  same  authority 
and  use ;  without  whose  approbation  not  even  the  original 
manuscripts  would  have  this  authority  as  to  us,  according  to 
that  (declaration)  of  St.  Augustine ;  *  I  would  not  believe  the 
Gospel,  unless  the  authority  of  the  church  constrained  me.' 

"  How  great  is  the  authority  of  the  edition  of  the  Latin 
vulgate  1 

"  Ans.  It  is  summary  and  infallible,  because  by  a  decree 
of  the  Council  of  Trent,  it  has  been  approved  and  declared 
authentic ;  and  so  that  it  is  a  certain  and  infallible  rule  of 
our  faith,  because  in  it  nothing  is  contained  contrary  to  faith 
or  morals,  nor  any  false  or  erroneous  sentiment. 

**  With  this  it  is  still  consistent,  say  Bukentop  and  others, 
that  our  vulgate  is  not  so  absolute  in  all  its  parts,  but  that 
something  in  it  might  have  been  expressed  more  significantly  ; 
some  more  clearly  translated,  some  rendered  into  better 
Latin,  and  some  placed  in  more  correct  order :  therefore  no 
one  can  deny  but  that  reference  may  usefully  be  made  to 
the  Hebrew  or  Greek  text,  (although  these  are  not  free  from 
errors  peculiar  to  them,)  &c.  &c. 

"Finally,  in  opposition  to  heretics,  and  for  the  under- 
standing of  Sacred  Scripture,  observe  the  following  things : 

"  1.  Sacred  Scripture  is  not  authentic  for  us,  except  through 
tradition  and  the  teaching  of  the  Church. 

"2.  Sacred  Scripture  is  to  be  received  in  that  sense  in 
which  the  Church  receives  it. 


CONCERNING  RULES  OF  FAITH.  151 

"  3.  The  legitimate  sense  of  Scripture  is  known  to  us 
through  tradition. 

"  4.  From  this  rule  it  follows  that  the  true  sense  of  Scrip- 
ture must  be  borrowed  from  the  doctrine  of  the  Holy 
Fathers ;  for  which  reason,  observe  the  decree  of  the  Council 
of  Trent,  sess.  4,  by  which  it  resolved  that  no  one  may  dare 
to  interpret  Sacred  Scripture  contrary  to  that  sense  which 
Holy  Mother  Church  held  and  holds,  or  contrary  to  the 
unanimous  consent  of  the  Fathers,  especially  in  matters  of 
faith  or  customs. 

"  5.  Sacred  Scripture  is  to  be  understood  in  the  obvious  and 
proper  meaning  of  the  words ;  unless  something  interposes 
to  the  contrary,  by  which  another  legitimate  sense  of  Scrip- 
ture may  be  proved. 

"  Finally,  by  means  of  the  passages  of  Scripture  which 
are  more  clear,  others  which  are  less  clear,  ought  to  be  elu- 
cidated. The  heretics  offend  against  this  rule,  for  whom  it 
is  a  common  thing  to  catch  up  some  obscure  passages,  to 
which  they  misapply  all  others,  even  the  clearest  texts." 

What  the  papists  mean  by  the  unanimous  consent  of  the 
Fathers,  is  not  easy  to  determine.  One  thing  is  certain, 
there  is  as  much  discrepancy  between  the  Fathers  as  there 
is  among  any  other  writers  on  Christian  faith  and  morals. 
We  can  defy  all  the  priests  in  creation  to  sustain  any  one 
dogma  which  is  peculiar  to  the  Romish  Church,  by  the 
"  unanimous  testimony  of  the  Fathers."  Notwithstanding 
all  the  bare-faced  interpolations  by  which  many  editions  of 
the  primitive  Christian  writings  have  been  corrupted,  they 
are  still  unable  to  make  out  their  case. 


152  CONCERNING  TRADITIONS. 


CHAPTER  XVIII. 

f        Concerning  Traditions  and  their  Divisions.     (66.) 

"  What  is  tradition  ? 

"  j4w5.  Generally  understood,  it  is  nothing  else  than  un- 
written doctrine :  not  as  though  it  could  never  be  found 
written ;  but  because  it  has  not  been  written  by  its  author, 
nor  dictated  by  him  that  it  might  be  written. 

"  Tradition,  therefore,  as  it  is  taken  theologically,  may  be 
defined :  '  a  doctrine  pertaining  to  religion,  which  is  commu- 
nicated orally  by  its  author,  and  is  transmitted  to  posterity, 
whether  it  be  afterwards  written  by  any  one  or  not.' 

"  How  is  tradition  divided  ? 

"  Ans.  1.  On  account  of  its  origin  or  author,  into  divine, 
apostolic,  and  ecclesiastical  tradition. 

"  2.  On  account  of  its  matter,  into  dogmatic,  ritual, 
and  moral  tradition. 

"3.  On  account  of  its  duration,  into  perpetual  and  tem- 
poral. 

"  4.  On  account  of  its  place,  into  universal  and  par- 
ticular. 

"  What  tradition  is  called  divine  ? 

"  Ans.  It  is  the  unwritten  word  of  God,  or  it  is  a  truth 
divinely  revealed  to  the  Church,  and  transmitted  by  the 
Fathers  to  the  latest  posterity  without  the  writing  of  a  canon- 
ical author.  Examples  of  divine  tradition  are :  that  there 
are  seven  sacraments,  neither  more  nor  less ;  that  there 
are  four  gospels ;  that  the  Mother  of  God  always  remained 
a  virgin ;  that  infants  are  to  be  baptized  ;  and  various  other 
things,  which  relate  to  the  substance  and  forms  of  the  sacra- 
ments. 

"  Apostolic  tradition  is  that  which  was  instituted  by  the 
apostles  as  the  pastors  of  the  Church ;  such  is  the  observ- 
ance of  the  Lord's  day,  the  forty  days'  fast,  and  various 
riles  of  the  mass  and  sacraments. 

"  That  is  called  ecclesiastical  tradition,  which  was  intro- 
duced by  the  superiors  of  the  Church  or  by  Christian  people 
after  the  times  of  the  apostles ;  such  are  the  observance  of 


CONCERNING  TRADITIONS.  lH 

festivals,  abstinence  from  eggs  and  milk-diet  on  certain 
days,  &c. 

"  Yet  observe,  that  these  terms,  divine,  apostolic,  eccle- 
siastical tradition,  are  sometimes  so  confounded  that  some- 
thing is  said  to  be  of  apostolic  or  ecclesiastic  tradition, 
which  is  of  divine  tradition,  and  vice  versa. 

"  What  tradition  is  called  dogmatic  ? 

"  It  is  that  which  treats  concerning  the  doctrines  of  the 
faith ;  as  is  .that  by^  which  the  existence  of  Scripture  is 
proved,  and  that  it  is  the  word  of  God,  &c. 

*'  Ritual  is  concerning  sacred  rites :  such  is  the  doctrine 
of  the  ceremonies  which  are  observed  in  the  sacrifice  of  the 
mass,  the  administration  of  the  sacraments,  &c. 

"  Moral  pertains  to  customs ;  as  that  on  certain  days 
fasts  are  to  be  observed,  that  the  festival  of  Easter  is  to  be 
celebrated,  &c. 

*'  Perpetual  tradition  is  that  which  is  instituted  that  it  may 
always  be  kept ;  such  are  the  divine  traditions. 

"  Temporal  is  that  which  is  instituted  for  a  certain  time: 
as  abstinence  from  blood  and  things  strangled  was  at  the 
beginning  of  the  Church. 

*'  Universal  tradition  is  that  which  is  proposed  for  obser- 
vation to  the  whole  Church  :  as  the  observance  of  the  Lord's 
day. 

"  Particular  is  that  which  was  appointed  for  one  or  more 
particular  churches :  thus,  in  the  time  of  St.  Augustine,  a 
fast  was  observed  at  Rome  on  the  Sabbath,  but  not  at  Milan. 

*'  How  great  is  the  authority  of  tradition  ? 

*'  Divine  tradition  has  equal  authority  with  Holy  Scrip- 
ture ;  for  both  are  truly  -the  word  of  God.  There  is  only 
this  difference,  that  as  for  Holy  Scripture,  the  creed  of  the 
church  is  more  plain  to  us ;  from  the  circumstance  that  it 
has  fixed  the  catalogue  of  canonical  books,  and  has  ap- 
proved the  edition  of  the  vulgate  as  authentic ;  but  the 
church  has  not  framed  a  catalogue  of  divine  traditions,  but 
sets  forth,  sometimes  one,  sometimes  another,  as  occasion 
demands. 

"  Apostolic  tradition  has  the  same  authority,  which  the 
decrees  of  the  apostolic  institution  have. 

"  Ecclesiastical  tradition  is  of  the  same  authority  as  the 
ecclesiastical  laws  and  constitutions :  and  hence  the  Pope 
13* 


154  CONCERNING  TRADITIONS. 

may  change  both  an  apostolic  and  an  ecclesiastical  (tradi- 
tion.) 

"  Is  tradition  a  rule  of  faith,  and  which  (tradition  is  a 
rule?) 

"  Ans.  Merely  apostolic  or  ecclesiastical  tradition  is  not 
a  rule  of  faith  ;  because  neither  has  been  divinely  revealed  ; 
but  divine  tradition  is  truly  a  rule  of  faith,  as  it  is  the  word 
of  God,  not  less  than  Holy  Scripture.  We  will  especially 
establish  this  tradition,  as  the  heretics  assail  it  chiefly." 

Concerning  the  existence  and  necessity  of  Traditions.  (67.) 

"  Are  divine  traditions  to  be  admitted  besides  Sacred  Scrip- 
ture? 

"  Ans.  Our  heretics  say  no,  principally  on  this  ground, 
that  all  truths  of  the  faith  are  contained  in  Sacred  Scripture  ; 
against  this  error,  the  Catholic  faith  teaches,  that  divine  tra- 
ditions are  to  be  admitted  in  the  new  law,  as  the  Council  of 
Trent  has  decided,  Sess.  4. 

"  The  existence  and  necessity  of  the  same  are  proved,  1. 
from  2  Thess.  ii.  14,  where  the  apostle  says:  'hold  the 
traditions,  which  you  have  learned,  whether  by  word  or  by 
our  epistle ;'  i.  e.  whether  in  word,  or  writing. 

"  Hither  tends  also  that  which  the  apostle  writes,  2  Tim. 
i.  13  ;  '  hold  the  form  of  sound  words,  which  thou  hast  heard 
from  me  in  faith,  and  in  the  love  which  is  in  Jesus  Christ,' 
and  ch.  iii.  14.  '  Continue  thou  in  the  things  which  thou 
hast  learned,  and  which  have  been  committed  to  thee ;  know- 
ing of  whom  thou  hast  learned.'  God  refers  also  to  tradi- 
tion, Deut.  xxxii.  7.  '  Ask  thy  father  and  he  will  declare  to 
thee ;  thy  elders  and  they  will  tejl  thee.'  Besides,  John 
says,  that  not  all  the  things  which  Christ  taught,  were  writ- 
ten, ch.  xxi.  25.  '  But  there  are  also  many  other  things 
which  Jesus  did;  which  if  they  were  written  every  one,  the 
world  itself,  I  think,  would  not  be  able  to  contain  the  books 
that  should  be  written.'  Very  many  things  also,  which  he 
taught  the  apostles  during  the  40  days  after  the  resurrection 
have  come  down  to  us  through  tradition.  Add  to  this  the 
unanimous  consent  of  the  Holy  Fathers. 

2.  It  is  proved  (thus.)  Our  heretics  assert  that  they  be- 
lieve many  things  which  are  no  where  found  in  Scripture ; 
for  instance ;  the  virginity  of  the  divine  Virgin,  even  after 


CONCERNING  TRADITIONS.  155 

the  birth  (of  Christ)  ;  that  there  are  four  gospels ;  that  bap- 
tism  Jl^plied  to  infants  is  valid,  &c. 

3.  "  It  is  proved  from  the  necessity  of  tradition  :  for  with- 
out divine  tradition  it  cannot  be  known  what  books  are 
Sacred  Scripture;  why  the  gospel  of  Matthew  should  rather 
be  received  than  that  of  Bartholomew ;  what  is  the  meaning 
of  Scripture,  where  there  is  no  other  means  of  discerning 
those  things,  at  least  no  ordinary  one:  although  God  might 
show  these  things  in  an  extraordinary  way,  as  for  instance, 
by  a  miracle  ;  but  then  the  course  of  tradition  supplies  the 
(place  of  a)  miracle. 

"  Hexce  observe  there  is  more  need  of  divine 
TRADITION  THAN  OF  Sacred  Scripture,  as  Scfipture  can- 
not be  known  without  tradition. 

"  The  heretics  object.  One  divine  tradition  can  be  known 
without  the  other ;  therefore  Sacred  Scripture  can  be  known 
without  divine  tradition. 

"  The  inference  is  plain  ;  just  as  tradition  is  the  word  of 
God  orally  delivered,  so  Scripture  is  the  written  word  of 
God :  but  the  word  of  God  orally  delivered  may  be  known 
without  any  other  divine  tradition,  therefore  by  parity  of 
reasoning  the  written  word  of  God  may  be  thus  known. 

"  A?is.  I  deny  both  the  inference  and  the  parity  ;  there  is 
a  disparity,  because  divine  tradition  is  a  living  witness,  and 
Scripture  is  a  dead  witness,  which  therefore  does  not  prove 
itself. 

*'  For  this  reason,  it  is  to  be  observed  that  divine  tradition 
must  be  considered  according  to  its  own  origin  ;  but  the 
origin  of  divine  tradition  is  from  the  fact  that  God  has  re- 
vealed some  truth  to  the  church  by  means  of  speech ;  now 
oral  address  proves  itself:  for  there  is  no  need  when  any 
one  speaks  that  he  should  also  affirm  that  he  is  speaking : 
and  thus  the  church  can  propose  to  us  one  divine  tradition 
without  any  ulterior  one.  But  the  church  receives  Scripture, 
not  by  means  of  oral  communication  and  speech,  but  by 
means  of  an  instrument  written  by  the  sacred  penman,  who 
might  even  be  ignorant  that  he  was  writing  the  word  of 
God  ;  hence  the  church  could  not  know  that  other  Scripture 
had  been  dictated  by  God,  unless  God  should  further  prove 
by  this  revelation  that  this  Scripture  had  been  dictated  by 
God ;  and  this  ulterior  revelation  is  called  divine  tradition. 


15f>  CONCERNING  TRADITIONS. 

"  You  will  reply :  but  the  church  without  tradition  can 
define  what  is  Sacred  Scripture.  The  supposition  is  proved  ; 
the  church  is  infallible,  therefore,  &c. 

*'  Ans.  I  deny  this  supposition :  the  church  is  indeed  in- 
fallible in  definitions  of  faith  and  customs ;  but  in  order  that 
she  may  define  she  ought  not  to  proceed  in  a  blind  way,  but 
to  have  sufficient  ground  for  her  definition  ;  but  the  church 
has  not  any  other  sufficient  ground  by  which  she  may  dis- 
cern Sacred  Scripture  from  that  which  is  not  sacred,  than 
divine  tradition,  therefore,  &;c. 

"  Although  some  divine  traditions  may  have  existed,  yet 
they  could  not  be  preserved  pure  and  entire  to  this  time; 
because  that  which  passes  from  ear  to  ear  is  easily  altered 
and  lost :  but  tradition  passes  from  ear  to  ear,  therefore,  &c. 

"  Ans.  I  admit  the  assertion,  that  what  passes  from  ear  to 
ear  is  easily  altered,  if  there  are  no  causes  assisting  in  its 
preservation  ;  but  if  there  are  such  causes,  I  deny  the  asser- 
tion ;  but  these  causes  are  divine  providence,  which  rules 
and  governs  the  Church,  the  writings  of  the  ancients,  the 
continuous  practice  of  the  faithful ;  add  to  this,  that  in  almost 
all  ages  new  heresies  arise,  which  God  wonderfully  employs 
for  the  preservation  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Church  against 
them.  Learned  men  also  are  always  raised  up  by  God, 
who  investigate  and  commend  to  posterity  the  doctrine  of 
the  Church  and  ancient  traditions." 

CONCERNING    THE    PRINCIPAL    RULES    OF   TRADITION. 

1.  Rules  for  distinguishing  Traditions. 

"  Are  there  any  special  rules  for  ascertaining  traditions  ? 

"  Yes ;  and  the  following  are  usually  assigned  : 

"1.  If  the  whole  Church  embraces  any  thing  as  a  dogma 
of  faith  or  customs,  has  approved  by  practice  something 
which  no  one  but  God  alone  could  institute,  and  which  is  not 
found  in  Scripture,  it  must  needs  be  a  divine  tradition  ;  thus, 
for  instance,  we  know  that  the  baptism  of  infants  is  valid, 
and  that  confirmation  and  ordination  cannot  be  repeated,  &c. 

"  2.  If  any  truth  not  contained  in  Scripture,  has  been  re- 
ceived in  the  Church,  and  the  contrary  doctrine  to  it  has 
been  condemned  as  heretical,  it  is  a  divine  tradition :  such  is 
the  perpetual  virginity  of  the  Mother  of  God. 


CONCERNING  TRADITIONS.  157 

"  3.  Whatever  the  unanimous  consent  of  the  Holy  Fathers 
and  doctors  declares  the  Church  to  have  received  from  the 
apostles,  has  certainly  been  orally  delivered  by  them. 

"  4.  '  Whatever  the  universal  Church  holds,  and  which 
is  found  to  have  been  appointed  neither  in  councils  nor  else- 
where, but  has  always  been  retained,  we  most  certainly  be- 
lieve to  have  been  handed  down  by  apostolic  authority,'  says 
St.  Augustine,  book  4.  against  the  Donatists. 

"  It  must  be  observed,  remarks  Sylvius,  that  by  the  third 
and  fourth  rule  it  is  ascertained  that  a  thing  has  been  handed 
down  by  the  apostles,  but  not  whether  the  tradition  is  purely 
apostolic,  as  it  is  distinguished  from  divine ;  but  then  it  will 
be  known  to  be  such  if  the  thing  might  have  been  instituted 
by  human  authority,  as  is,  for  instance,  the  forty  days'  fast. 

"5.  'Whatever  the  Roman  Church  holds  as  tradition,  is 
to  be  regarded  as  such,'  says  St.  Jerome.  Bk.  3.  ch.  3. 

"  6.  Whatever  the  catholic  church  holds  or  de- 
clares AS  SUCH  is  to  be  REGARDED  AS  TRADITION." 

concerning   THE    JUDGE    OF    CONTROVERSIES    RESPECTING 
THE    FAITH.     (69.) 

Besides  the  inanimate  rule  of  faith  there  is  need  of 
an  animate,  (rule.) 

"  Is  any  other  rule  of  faith  to  be  admitted  besides  Sacred 
Scripture  and  divine  tradition  ? 

"  Ans.  Yes :  Because  when  a  controversy  arises,  which 
is  Sacred  Scripture  or  tradition  ;  also,  what  their  meaning  is ; 
this  controversy  Scripture  or  tradition  itself  cannot  settle, 
therefore  there  is  need  of  another  rule,  viz.  an  animate  one, 
which  may  decide  controversies :  for  every  legislator  who 
founds  any  society  whatever,  ought  to  leave  behind  him, 
those  who  may  represent  his  authority  for  establishing  the 
authenticity,  sense,  &c.  of  the  laws  :  in  the  same  proportion 
then  as  laws  are  more  remote  from  the  apprehension  of  men, 
(as  in  the  belief  of  the  mysteries  of  religion,  and  the  rules 
of  customs),  the  greater  is  the  necessity  of  a  vicarious  au- 
thority of  the  legislator :  which  certainly  in  the  matter  of 
religion  ought  not  to  be  of  just  any  kind  whatever,  but  in- 
fallible, lest  every  thing  should  remain  doubtful  and  uncer- 
tam,  and  thus  religion  itself  become  useless. 


158  CONCERNING  TRADITIONS. 

"  Nor  is  it  any  obstacle  that  the  .church  is  not  above 
Scripture  and  divine  tradition :  for  the  church  does  not  judge 
concerning  them  with  the  judgment  of  power,  either  by 
changing  them,  or  by  deciding  whether  that  which  Sacred 
Scripture  teaches  is  true  or  false:  but  it  decides  concerning 
them,  only  -with  the  judgment  of  discretion,  by  discerning 
and  declaring  which  is  Sacred  Scripture  or  divine  tradition, 
what  is  their  sense,  &c. 

"  The  case  is  different  with  respect  to  traditions  merely 
apostolical  or  ecclesiastical,  in  regard  to  which  the  church 
exercises  also  the  judgment  of  power,  with  the  faculty  of 
changing  them,  &c. 

"  Observe,  that  although,  besides  Sacred  Scripture  and 
traditions  a  living  rule  is  to  be  admitted,  yet  it  may  rightly 
be  said  that  our  faith  rests  alone  on  Sacred  Scripture  and 
divine  tradition :  because  nothing  is  believed  with  a  divine 
faith  unless  it  be  contained  in  Sacred  Scripture,  and  divine 
tradition. 

"  What  is  the  judge  of  controversies  concerning  the  faith 
and  customs  ? 

"  Ans.  The  church,  whether  scattered  or  assembled  in 
general  council,  and  the  Pope  the  head  of  the  church,  as  will 
appear  from  what  is  to  be  said  hereafter. 

"  The  Lutherans  and  Calvinists  state  as  the  judge,  Sacred 
Scripture  alone,  or  as  understood  by  the  private  opinion  of 
every  man  :  the  English  heretics  pretend  that  this  judgment 
I     belongs  to  secular  judges." 

If  the  Romish  Church  admits  the  divine  inspiration  of  the 
Scriptures,  she  must  of  course  be  prepared  to  abide  by  the 
testimony  of  God's  word.  Now,  the  Bible,  in  plain  and  un- 
equivocal terms,  justifies  us  in  asserting  that  the  written  word 
of  God  is  an  all-sufficient  Rule  of  Faith.  Paul  in  his 
2  Epist.  to  Tim.  iii.  15,  16,  17,  plainly  declares,  "that  the 
Scriptures  are  able  to  make  us  wise  unto  salvation.  They 
are  profitable  for  doctrine,  for  reproof,  for  correction,  for  in- 
struction in  righteousness :   that  the  man  of  God  may  be 

PERFECT,    THOROUGHLY    FURNISHED  UntO    all    gOod  WOrks," 

and  what  more  do  we  want  ?   The  prophet  Isaiah  says,  "  To 


CONCERNING  TRADITIONS.  159 

the  law  and  to  the  testimony :  if  they  speak  not  according 
to  this  word,  it  is  because  there  is  no  light  in  them."  Isaiah 
never  would  have  approved  of  trying  the  law  and  testimony 
by  tradition  ;  he  was  for  holding  up  every  doctrine  and  custom 
before  the  clear  light  of  revelation,  and  thus  determining  its 
character.  If  the  Scriptures  are  able  to  instruct  us  in  every 
good  work,  to  teach  us  Christ  crucified,  to  give  us  light  in 
darkness,  to  settle  our  faith,  and  to  teach  us  the  whole  way 
of  salvation,  then  we  ask,  what  do  we  need  more  1  When 
the  lawyer  stood  up  and  asked  Christ,  "  Master,  what  shall 
I  do  to  inherit  eternal  life?  He  said  unto  hini.  What  is 
written  in  the  law?  How  readest  thou?"  And  when  the 
lawyer  replied,  "  Thou  shalt  love  the  Lord  thy  God  with  all 
thy  heart,  &c."  Christ's  answer  was,  "  This  do  and  thou 
shalt  live."  If  then  the  Scriptures  contain  all  things  neces- 
sary to  be  known  in  order  to  inherit  eternal  life,  they  must 
be  a  sufficient  rule  of  faith  and  practice.  Common  sense 
confirms  this  verdict.  The  Church  of  Rome  herself  is  in 
fact  obliged  to  appeal  to  Scripture  as  the  only  rule  in  many 
cases.  She  cannot,  for  instance,  prove  the  doctrine  of  the 
Trinity  by  tradition,  either  directly  or  indirectly ;  in  this 
case  she  must  refer  to  Scripture.  But  if  the  written  word  ia 
admitted  to  be  the  rule  in  one  point,  how  can  it  be  denied  in 
another  ?  If  its  testimony  is  received  in  one.  case,  it  nj£iy 
and  ought  to  be  acknowledged  in  every  other  in  which  it  is 
a  competent  witness,  as  it  claims  to  be  the  word  of  the  living 
God. 

But  the  Romish  Church  would  prove  the  necessity  of 
tradition  by  an  appeal  to  the  language  of  Paul ;  "  Hold  the 
traditions  which  you  have  learned,  whether  by  word  or  by 
our  Epistle."  (2  Thess.  ii.  14.) 

1.  To  this  we  answer,  that  these  words  do  not  import  that 
the  apostle  delivered  some  things  to  them  as  tradition,  and 
others  as  Scripture,  but  that  he  taught  them  the  same  truths 
both  orally  and.  in  writing. 


166  CONCERNING  TRADITIONS. 

2.  Even  supposing  that  the  things  which  he  thus  taught 
them  were  different^  this  proves  only  that  there  are  some 
important  and  precious  truths,  which  are  not  contained  in 
this  Epistle  to  the  Thessalonians,  though  all  that  is  neces- 
sary to  salvation  is  supplied  by  other  portions  of  Scripture. 

3.  Besides  if  we  wish  to  know  the  nature  of  the  things 
which  Paul  delivered  to  them  by  word  of  mouth,  we  shall 
find  from  Acts  xvii.  2,  that  they  were  altogether  Scriptural. 
There  we  are  told  that  when  they  came  to  Thessalonica, 
"  Paul,  as  his  manner  was,  went  in  unto  them,  and  three 
Sabbath  days  reasoned  with  them  out  of  the  scrip- 
tures," &c. 

As  for  the  quotation,  Deut.  xxxii.  7,  "  Ask  thy  father  and 
he  will  show  thee,  d&c,"  Moses  is  referring  the  children  of 
Israel  to  their  immediate  ancestors,  who  were  yet  living, 
and  who  could  recount  to  them  the  wonders  of  God's  provi- 
dence in  former  days. 

The  fact  that  Jesus  Christ  did  and  said  many  things  during 
his  ministry,  which  are  not  written  in  Scripture,  is  not  dis- 
puted by  Protestants.  All  that  we  affirm  is  that  sufficient 
has  been  recorded  to  make  us  wise  unto  salvation,  and  more 
than  this  we  do  not  need. 

But  it  is  farther  asserted  that  heretics  themselves  "  believe 
many  things,  which  are  no  where  found  in  Scripture." 

Of  this  there  can  be  no  doubt ;  and  orthodox  Christians 
do  the  same. 

We  know  that  Romish  tradition  teaches  the  virginity  of 
the  Mother  of  our  blessed  Lord  after  his  incarnation,  but  the 
Bible  teaches  the  contrary  very  plainly,  Matt.  i.  24,  25. 
The  virginity  of  Mary  previous  to  the  birth  of  Christ  is  a 
doctrine  of  divine  revelation ;  her  subsequent  virginity  is  a 
Romish  invention,  which  we  decline  endorsing.  As  for  the 
baptism  of  infants,  that  does  not  rest  upon  tradition  ;  infants 
of  believing  parents  had  a  right  to  church  membership  under 
the  Old  Covenant,  and  until  we  find  Scripture  in  the  New 


CONCERNING  TRADITIONS.  Iftt 

Testament,  which  disfranchises  them,  we  must  consider  them 
fit  subjects  for  Baptism,  with  all  deference  to  the  opinions  of 
those  who  differ  from  us.  Whenever  traditions  accord  with 
and  sustain  the  letter  and  spirit  of  Scripture,  and  are  well 
authenticated,  we  will  give  them  all  the  weight  they  deserve. 
In  this  case,  we  know  from  early  ecclesiastical  history  that 
Infant  Baptism  was  practised  in  the  Christian  church. 

We  decline  the  aid  of  Romish  tradition  also,  in  enabling 
us  to  ascertain  which  of  the  gospels  are  spurious,  and  which 
are  genuine.  There  is  internal  evidence  enough  to  establish 
the  authenticity  of  the  four  gospels. 

We  do  not  need  tradition  to  enable  us  to  discover  the 
sense  of  Scripture;  for  whilst  there  are  many  passages  con- 
cerning which  there  has  been  and  still  is  diversity  of  opinion, 
we  know  that  God  has  promised  to  give  wisdom  to  all  that 
ask  in  faith,  and  the  Holy  Spirit  is  pledged  to  show  every 
sincere  inquirer  after  truth,  who  searches  the  Scripture  with 
prayer,  what  he  must  do  to  be  saved. 

In  short,  notwithstanding  all  the  specious  reasoning  of 
Romanists,  their  arguments  amount  to  neither  more  nor  less 
than  a  petitio  principii,  a  begging  of  the  question.  They 
affirm  that  tradition  is  part  of  God's  word ;  and  how  do  they 
prove  it  ?  By  Scripture  they  cannot  establish  their  point ;  its 
testimony  is  decidedly  against  them  ;  and  if  they  seek  to 
prove  their  position  by  tradition  itself,  or  by  the  authority  of 
the  Church,  which  rests  upon  tradition,  they  argue  in  a 
vicious  circle. 

The  blasphemous  assertion  that  there  is  more  need  op 

DIVINE   TRADITION  THAN  OF  SACRED  SCRIPTURE,  is  WOrthy 

of  the  apostate  source  in  which  it  originates. 

The  doctrine  of  the  necessity  of  unwritten  traditions  is 
inconsistent  with  the  perfection  of  the  Scriptures,  and  utterly 
repugnant  to  the  object  for  which  they  were  designed.  They 
were  intended  as  the  Rule  of  Faith ;  but  a  rule  which  is  not 
sufficient  to  answer  its  purpose  is  no  rule  at  all.  But  not 
14 


162  CONCERNING  TRADITIONS. 

only  are  the  Scriptures  sufficient  in  themselves  to  make  men 
wise  unto  salvation,  thoroughly  furnished  unto  all  good  works, 
&c.,  but  God  expressly  forbids  any  thing  to  be  added  to  his 
word,  upon  any  pretext  whatsoever.  Paul  pronounces  an 
anathema  upon  any  man,  and  even  any  angel  from  heaven, 
that  should  preach  another  gospel.  (Gal.  i.  8.)  And  the  ca- 
non of  Scripture  closes  with  a  dreadful  curse  denounced  upon 
any  man  who  should  add  to,  or  take  from  the  word.  (Rev* 
xxii.  18.)  How  then  can  we  receive  those  traditions,  which 
are  declared  to  be  of  more  necessity  than  sacked  scrip- 


ture 


Whenever  God  gave  laws  or  directions  of  any  kind  to  hia 
church,  ever  since  the  days  of  Moses,  he  has  generally  caused 
it  to  be  done  in  writing :  "  Go  write  it  in  a  table,  note  it  in  a 
book,  that  it  may  be  for  the  time  to  come."  (Is.  xxx.  8.)  "  To 
write  the  same  things  to  you,  for  you,  is  safe."  (Phil.  iii.  1.) 
In  Rev.  ii.  it  is  said,  "  Write"  to  the  churches,  not  " deliver 
a  tradition  to  them."  Indeed  we  may  rest  assured  that  God 
would  not  permit  any  doctrine  or  truth  necessary  to  salva- 
tion to  depend  upon  the  uncertain  transmission  of  traditions, 
which  are  liable  to  be  corrupted  through  carelessness  or  pre- 
judice. 

The  notion  of  the  insufficiency  of  the  Scriptures,  the  ad- 
dition of  traditions  or  "  unwritten  verities,"  was  first  intro- 
duced by  the  Carpocratians  and  other  heretics,  and  is  directly 
what  the  apostle  has  forewarned  us  against.  "  Beware,  lest 
any  man  spoil  you  through  philosophy  and  vain  deceit,  after 
the  TRADITION  of  men." 

The  voice  of  the  purest  antiquity  is  against  tradition.  Jus- 
tin in  Tryphonem,  says.  If  we  will  be  safe  in  all  things,  we 
must  fly  to  the  Scriptures ;  we  must  believe  God  only,  and 
rest  wholly  on  his  institutions,  and  not  on  men^s  traditions. 

Irenseus,  lib.  3.  ch.  xiii.,  says  of  the  apostles,  that  what 
they  preached  by  mouth,  they  left  us  in  writing,  to  be  the 
pillar  and  ground-work  of  our  faith. 


CONCERNING  TRADITIONS.  163 

Tertullian,  de  Prsescript,  speaks  plainly,  and  to  the  point. 
It  were  folly  or  madness  (says  he)  to  think  that  the  apostle 
knew  all  things,  but  revealed  the  same  to  few ;  delivering 
some  things  openly  to  all,  but.  reserving  some  others  to  be 
spoken  in  secret  to  some.  And  again  :  "  We  have  no  cause 
to  be  curious  after  Christ,  nor  inquisitive  after  the  gospel, 
(viz.  for  any  other  things  to  be  believed  in  order  to  salvation.) 
"  When  we  believe,  the  first  thing  which  we  believe  is,  that 
there  is  nothing  further  which  we  ought  to  believe." 

Basilffe  Serm.  de  fide,  says ;  "  It  is  a  manifest  defection 
from  the  faith  to  bring  any  thing  that  is  not  written." 

And  as  a  counterpart  to  the  alleged  quotation  from  Jerome, 
"  Whatever  the  Roman  church  holds  as  tradition  is  to  be 
regarded  as  such,"  I  beg  leave  to  offer  the  following  from 
the  same  father,  on  Hag.  chap.  i.  "  All  traditions  pretended 
to  be  apostolic,  if  they  have  not  their  authority  from  the 
Scriptures,  are  cut  off  by  the  sword  of  God." 

But  we  cannot  dismiss  this  point  without  calling  attention 
to  the  short  and  easy  method  of  determining  traditions. 
"  Whatever  the  Catholic  church  holds  or  declares  as  such, 
is  to  be  regarded  as  tradition.^''  This  settles  the  apostolic 
character  of  the  Mass,  Extreme  Unction,  Invocation  of  Saints, 
Merit  of  Works,  the  Supremacy  of  the  Pope,  Holy  water, 
Holy  bones.  Holy  stones,  and  other  Holy  relics.  Prayers  for 
the  dead,  Auricular  Confession,  Penance,  Indulgences,  Image 
worship.  Celibacy  of  the  Priests,  &c.  &c.  The  church  of 
Christ  has  ever  protested  against  these  impious  inventions, 
and  has  demanded  the  reason  of  their  introduction.  Are 
they  taught  by  Scripture?  No!  Will  you  abandon  them? 
Abandon  them  ?  Not  we — they  are  apostolical  traditions  ! 
But  where  is  the  proof?  The  proof  is  here,  and  let  heretics 
read  it  and  ever  after  hold  their  peace ;  "  Whatever  the 
Catholic  Church  holds  or  declares  as  such,  is  to  be 
regarded  as  tradition  !" 


164       CONCERNING  THE  CHURCH. 

CHAPTER  XIX. 
Concerning  the  Chwck.     (70.) 

*'  What  is  the  church  1 

"  The  church,  generally  taken,  can  be  defined  for  every 
state,  place,  and  time,  (as  the)  congregation  of  the  faithful 
united  in  the  true  worship  of  God  under  Christ  their  head  ; 
which  definition  comprehends  also  the  faithful  of  the  Old 
Testament,  not  only  those  who  pertained  to  the  synagogue, 
but  also  other  believers  out  of  the  synagogue,  as  Job,  Mel- 
chisedeck,  &c. ;  also  the  blessed,  likewise  angels,  &c.,  souls 
detained  in  purgatory. 

"  How  is  the  church  divided,  generally  taken  ? 

"  It  is'  divided  into  three  members,  namely,  the  church 
triumphant,  suffering,  and  militant. 

"  The  church  triumphant  embraces  all  the  blessed  in  hea- 
ven, as  well  angels  as  men :  the  church  patient  or  suffering 
is  the  assembly  of  souls  detained  in  purgatory :  militant  is 
the  assembly  of  the  faithful  in  a  state  of  pilgrimage,  or  of 
such  who  are  as  yet  travailling  upon  earth. 

*'  The  church  militant  may  be  subdivided  into  the  church 
of  the  Old  Testament,  viz.  from  Adam  to  Christ,  which 
comprehended  both  Jews  and  Gentiles  professing  the  true 
faith ;  an.d  into  the  church  of  the  New  Testament,  concern- 
ing which  in  the  following  sections. 

"  What  is  the  church  of  the  New  Testament  1 

"  By  Canisius  it  is  defined  :  *  the  congregation  of  all  peo- 
ple professing  the  faith  and  doctrine  of  Christ,  which  is 
governed  under  one  next  to  Christ,  the  chief  head  and  pas- 
tor upon  earth.' " 

CONCERNING  THOSE  WHO  ARE  IN  THE  CHURCH.      (71.) 

*'  Are  unbaptized  persons  in  the  church  ? 

"  No,  because  baptism  is  the  gate,  through  which  we  come 
into  the  church,  as  the  Council  of  Trent,  sess.  xiv.  ch.  2. 
teaches ;  and  hence  also,  (Acts,  ii.  41,)  those  who  were  bap- 
tized were  said  to  be  added,  as  to  Christ's  mystical  body 


CONCERNING  THE  CHURCH.  165 

which  is  the  church :  '  they  therefore  that  received  his  word 
were  baptized  ;  and  there  were  added  to  them  in  that  day 
about  three  thousand  souls,'  therefore,  before  they  were  not 
of  the  church. 

"  Cannot  Catechumens,  indeed,  be  said  to  belong  to  the 
church  1 

"  No,  for  the  same  reason  that  they  have  not  yet  entered 
through  baptism. 

"  Obj.  According  to  the  fourth  Lat.  Counc,  no  one  out 
of  the  church  can  be  saved  ;  but  a  Catechumen  may  be 
saved  through  perfect  contrition;  therefore  he  is  in  the 
church. 

"  Ans.  I  distinguish  the  inference :  I  deny  the  inference 
that  he  is  therefore  in  the  church  really  ;  I  agree  entirely 
that  he  is  in  the  church  as  to  vow  and  desire ;  but  it  is 
enough  for  a  Catechumen  to  be  saved,  that  he  be  in  the 
church  by  vow  or  desire,  (because  he  is  enlbraced  in  perfect 
contrition  :)  and  hence  the  words  of  the  Lateran  Council 
should  be  understood  of  those,  who  are  in  the  church  neither 
in  reality,  nor  by  vow. 

"But  at  least  are  not  those  in  the  church,  who  are  sup- 
posed to  be  baptized,  and  thus  commune  in  the  participation 
of  the  sacraments  and  the  confession  of  faith,  although  in 
fact  they  have  not  been  baptized  1 

"  Ans.  Wiggers,  with  some  others,  says  yes  :  but  Bellar- 
mine,  Steyaert,  Daleman,  Danes,  &c.,  say  no,  for  reasons 
already  mentioned  :  yet  such  persons  although  not  in  reality, 
yet  belong  to  the  church  by  vow,  and  thus  can  be  saved. 

"Are  all  baptized  persons  in  the  church? 

"  No :  and  especially  manifest  heretics  and  apostates  are 
not  of  the  church;  because  they  do  not  profess  the  same 
faith  and  doctrine  with  those,  who  are  in  the  church ;  but 
this  is  expressed  in  the  definition  of  the  church. 

"  Obj.  The  church  judges  and  punishes  heretics ;  but  it 
does  not  judge  those,  who  are  without,  according  to  the 
apostle,  1  Cor.  v.  12.  '  What  have  I  to  do  to  judge  those 
that  are  without?'  Therefore  they  are  in  the  church. 

"  Ans.  I  deny  the  inference :  for  although  heretics  are 
out  of  the  church,  yet  by  reason  of  baptism  they  remain 
subject  to  the  church :   and  hence   she  justly  punishes 

THEM    AS    DESERTERS    FROM    THE    CAMP    OF    THE    CHURCH, 
14* 


166        CONCERNING  THE  CHURCH. 

and,  therefore,  they  are  under  obligation  of  returning;  but 
the  apostle  speaks  of  those,  who  have  never  entered  the 
church  or  have  never  been  baptized. 

"  Open  schismatics  are  also  not  in  the  church :  for  they 
have  separated  themselves  from  the  unity  of  the  church : 
and  hence  the  church  in  Parasceve,  just  as  she  prays  for 
heretics  that  they  may  return  to  the  church,  prays  also  for 
schismatics. 

"  Do  secret  heretics  belong  to  the  church  1  the  same  is 
asked  concerning  secret  apostates. 

"  Ans,  There  is  a  difference  of  opinion  among  authors : 
if  they  are  secret,  merely  internal  heretics,  it  seems  proper 
to  say  that  such  persons  are  in  the  church ;  because  neither 
has  the  church  separated  them,  nor  have  they  separated 
themselves  from  the  visible  union  of  the  church ;  whence  it 
may  be  said,  that  they  still  are  members  of  the  church,  not 
indeed  living,  but  dead  and  dry,  as  a  withered  arm  may  still 
be  called  a  member  of  the  body. 

"  But  if  they  are  external,  secret  heretics,  then  it  appears 
they  are  not  in  the  church  ;  because  by  this  very  fact  they 
have  been  excommunicated  or  cut  off  from  the  church. 

"Yet  Daelman  plausibly  supposes  that  excommunicated, 
but  not  interdicted  persons  are  in  the  church,  although  they 
are  deprived  of  the- internal  influences  and  communion  of  the 
Saints,  not  by  right,  but  in  fact,  and  through  the  indulgence 
of  the  church  ;  and  hence  they  are  iiot  deprived  of  jurisdic- 
tion, as  was  said.  No.  56.  According  to  Daelman,  there- 
fore, it  is  probable  that  those  excommunicated  persons  alone 
are  out  of  the  church,  who  by  a  particular  sentence  have 
been  by  name  denounced  as  such. 

"  From  what  has  been  said,  it  is  inferred  that  all  those  are 
out  of  the  church,  who  either  have  not  entered  the  church, 
or  whom  the  church  casts  from  her,  or  who  of  their  own 
accord  have  separated  themselves  from  the  church." 

The  72d  section  discusses  the  question  whether  all  the 
elect,  and  they  only,  are  in  the  church,  and  concludes  with 
this  summary  as  the  result  of  the  investigation. 

"  From  what  has  been  said,  you  may  gather,  who  are 
members  of  the  Church  militant,  viz.  all  persons  truly  bap- 
tized, externally  professing  the  Catholic  faith,  and  partaking 
of  the  sacraments  of  the  church,  with  due  subjection  towards 


CONCERNING  THE  CHURCH.       1G7 

the   lawful    pastors   of  the   church,  especially  the  Roman 
Pontiff. 

"  Observe  that  the  doctrine  of  the  heretics  by  which  they 
assert  that  the  church  consists  of  the  elect  only,  or  of  the 
just  alone,  tends  to  this  that  they  may  make  the  church  in- 
visible, and  hence  let  section  73  treat 

Of  the  msihility  of  the  church. 

"  Is  the  church  visible  ? 

"  1.  Yes.  This  is  proved  from  Matt.  v.  14,  where  it  is 
said  concerning  the  church :  '  a  city  set  upon  a  hill  cannot 
be  hid  ;'  and  thus  the  church  is  not  only  visible,  but  evidently 
conspicuous,  like  a  city  set  upon  a  hill  :*as  Augustine,  &c. 
says,  '  The  church  stands  forth  before  all,  clear  and  con- 
spicuous, for  it  is  a  city,  built  upon  a  hill,  which  cannot  be 
hid.' 

"2.  It  is  proved  from  Matt,  xviii.  16,  where  Christ  com- 
mands that  the  faithful  should  tell  it  to  the  church,  that  is,  to 
the  superiors  of  the  church,  when  private  fraternal  reproof 
does  no.  good  :  and  again  he  commands,  that  if  a  reproved 
brother  shall  not  hear  the  church,  he  must  be  regarded  as  a 
heathen  and  a  publican ;  now  he  cannot  be  denounced  to  the 
church,  nor  hear  her,  if  the  church  is  invisible;  therefore,  &c. 

"  3.  It  is  proved  from  reason ;  all  ought  to  come  to  the 
church  under  peril  of  eternal  damnation ;  therefore,  it  must 
be  visible  or  cognizable. 

Obj.  I.  Christ  says  to  the  Samaritan  woman,  John  iv.  23, 
*  The  hour  cometh,  and  now  is,  when  the  true  worshippers 
shall  worship  the  Father  in  spirit  and  in  truth  ;'  therefore,  &c. 

"  Ans,  I  deny  the  inference  :  for  that  (phrase)  '  in  spirit,' 
does  not  exclude  external  worship;  but  teaches  that  to 
external  worship  internal  is  to  be  joined :  and  hence  it  is 
opposed  to  the  worship  of  the  Jews  and  the  Samaritans, 
most  of  whom  stopped  in  external  rites  only ;  and  the  ex- 
pression, '  in  truth,'  is  opposed  to  the  figures  of  the  old  law, 
or  also  to  the  worship  of  the  Samaritans,  which  was  mixed 
up  with  many  corruptions. 

"  Obj.  II.  Christ  says,  Luke  xvii.  20,  '  The  kingdom  of 
God  does  not  come  with  observation ;'  therefore  the  church 
cannot  be  observed  or  seen. 

"  Ans.  I  deny  the  inference :  for  there  the  question  is  not 


1G8        CONCERNING  THE  CHURCH. 

concerning  the  church,  but  the  kingdom  of  God  is  put  for 
the  coming  of  Messiah ;  and  hence  the  meaning  is,  Messiah 
does  not  come  with  observation,  i.  e.,  with  pomp  and  royal 
parade,  as  the  Jews  expected. 

"  How  is  the  church  said  to  be  visible  ? 

"  Ans.  The  church  is  formally  to  be  seen  and  known  not 
only  through  faith  and  the  understanding,  but  also  by  physi- 
cal senses;  because  the  church  is  not  only  spiritual  by  rea- 
son of  the  internal  form  of  faith,  hope,  charity,  &c.,  but  it 
also  is  a  certain  material  and  sensible  body,  because  it  em- 
braces a  visible  head,  visible  persons,  the  external  profession 
of  faith,  sensible  sacraments,  the  order  of  a  visible  priest- 
hood. 

"  Through  what  is  the  church  seen  sensibly  ? 

"  Ans.  By  her  own  marks,  which  are  so  peculiar  to  our 
church,  that  they  can  be  found  in  no  other  congregation  or 
sect ;  and  hence  the  church  is  visible,  not  only  to  the  faith- 
ful, but  also  to  those  who  do  not  hold  the  faith,  as  heretics, 
Jews,  and  Gentiles." 

The  arrogant  demand  of  the  Romish  Church  to  be  re- 
garded as  the  only  and  the  true  Church  of  Christ,  containing 
in  her  communion  all  who  shall  be  saved,  deserves  no  re- 
futation. We  pass  by  this  impudent  claim  with  sincere  pity 
for  the  deluded  members  of  that  apostate  church,  whom 
"  with  all  deceivableness  of  unrighteousness,"  she  entices 
from  the  way  of  God's  testimonies.  Our  theologian  in  con- 
tending for  the  visibility  of  the  Church  against  "  the  here- 
tics," is  wasting  his  eloquence  and  his  prowess  upon  a  man 
of  straw.  We  believe  in  a  visible  church.  We  need  not 
be  told  that  the  Church  of  Christ  and  the  private  members 
also  of  that  church  are  as  a  city  set  on  a  hill  that  cannot  be 
hid.  Surely  the  church  of  Rome  has  sufficient  reason  both 
to  know  and  feel  that  the  Protestant  church  is  visible ;  if  she 
does  not  know  it,  the  noble  army  of  martyrs,  who  were 
slain  by  the  blood-thirsty  minions  of  the  Pope,  stand  forth 
as  witnesses,  who  being  dead  yet  speak.  The  flames  of 
persecution,  which  have  reddened  the  sky  of  every  kingdom 


CONCERNING  MARKS  OF  THE  CHURCH.         169 

and  country,  which  the  Babylonish  woman  has  intoxicated 
with  the  wine  of  her  lewdness  and  blasphemy,  have  made 
the  Protestant  church  a  burning  and  a  shining  lisht  in  the 
world.  We  yiem  the  point,  however,  that  the  church  of 
Rome  has  her  own  peculiar  marks.  She  bears  upon  her 
brazen  face  the  marks  of  the  beast,  mentioned  in  the 
Apocalypse.  They  are  so  indelibly  stamped  upon  her  brow, 
that  he  who  reads  her  history  cannot  fail  to  recognise  her  as 
the  base  deceiver  and  apostate,  against  whom  the  finger  of 
divine  prophecy  is  pointed.   These  marks  are  superstition, 

PERFIDY,  FALSEHOOD,  and  BLOOD. 


CHAPTER  XX. 
Concerning  the  Marks  of  the  Church.   (74.) 

"  What  is  understood  by  a  mark  of  the  church  ? 

"  A  certain  sign  and  peculiarity  by  which  the  true  church 
can  be  known,  and  discerned  from  all  other  assemblies. 

"  How  many  are  the  marks  of  the  church? 

"  Four  principal  ones  are  enumerated,  expressed  in  the 
Constantinopolitan  symbol,  viz.  that  she  is  one,  holy,  catho- 
lic and  apostolic. 

"  That  these  are  the  marks  of  the  true  church,  the  au- 
thority of  the  symbol  just  quoted,  and  the  consent  of  the 
apostles  and  fathers  prove :  these  reason  proves  and  Scrip- 
ture attests. 

"  Calvin  and  sectarians  appoint  only  two  marks  of  the 
church,  viz.  the  sincere  preaching  of  the  word  of  God,  and 
the  legitimate  use  of  the  sacraments. 

"  These  two,  although  they  are  found  in  the  true  church 
of  Christ,  are  yet  foolishly  laid  down  as  marks  of  the 
church  :  for  the  marks  ought  to  be  more  notorious  than  the 
thing,  which  they  are  to  characterize:  but  it  is  at  least  as 
difficult  to  know  which  is  the  sincere  preaching  of  the  word 
of  God,  (and)  which  is  the  legitimate  use  of  the  sacraments, 
as  which  is  the  true  church. 


170       CONCERNING  MARKS  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

"But  as  the  four  abovementioned  marks  pertain  to  the 
Roman  Catholic  Church  alone,  it  follows  that  she  is  the 
ONLY  church  of  Christ :  and  in  order  that  this  may  ap^^ear 
m#re  clearly,  we  will  consider  them  one  by  one." 

Concerning  the  mark  of  the  church  by  which  she  is  called 
ONE.    (75.) 

"  Prove  that  unity  is  the  mark  of  the  true  church. 

"  It  is  proved  from  various  texts  of  Sacred  Scripture,  in 
which  unity  is  attributed  to  the  church :  thus,  it  is  said,  John 
X.  16.,  '  one  fold  and  one  pastor;'  and  John  xvii.  21,  Christ 
prays  for  unity  for  his  sheep :  that  they  all  may  be  one ; 
also  the  apostle,  1  Cor.  x.  17.,  says,  '  We  being  many  are 
one  body,'  and  Eph.  iv.  4,  5.  '  One  body,  one  faith,  one  bap- 
tism.' 

"  This  unity  all  the  fathers  acknowledged  in  time  past, 
and  from  it  they  confuted  heretics  and  schismatics ;  amongst 
them,  St.  Cyprian  wrote  his  book  concerning  the  unity  of 
the  church. 

"  In  what  does  the  unity  of  the  church  consist? 

*'  In  unity  of  head,  in  unity  of  faith  and  doctrine,  in  the 
consent  of  minds,  in  the  communion  of  the  same  sacra- 
ments, and  of  other  things  pertaining  to  the  communion  of 
the  Saints. 

"  Unity  of  head  is  found  in  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  ; 
because  in  it  there  is  no  visible  head  under  Christ  except  the 
Roman  Pontiff,  to  whom  all  the  bishops  and  the  faithful  are 
subordinate,  and  are  united  as  in  a  centre  of  unity,  and  who 
exercises  visible  jurisdiction  and  rule  over  the  whole  church. 

"  This  unity  of  the  church  is  manifestly  found  in  no  sect, 
not  even  among  the  Greeks,  who  obey  different  Patriarchs. 

"  Unity  of  faith  and  doctrine,  equally  shines  forth  in  the 
Roman  Catholic  Church,  in  which  all  the  faithful,  although 
scattered  over  the  whole  earth,  believe  the  same  doctrines 
of  faith  ;  neither  in  any  definitions  of  the  church,  con- 
cerning the  faith,  can  repugnant  things  he  proved  ;  but 
among  heretics  and  schismatics  there  is  no  agreement  of 
faith ;  but  there  are  as  many  opinions  as  heads ;  as  many 
faiths  as  wills. 

"  You  will  say :  In  the  Roman  Church  there  is  also 
diversity  of  doctrine,  because  the  doctrines  of  the  Thomists, 


CONCERNING  MARKS  OF  THE  CHURCH.   171 

Scotists,  and  Molinists,  are  opposed  to  one  another  in  many- 
things  ;  therefore,  &c. 

"  1  deny  the  inference :  for  as  has  been  said,  the  unity  of 
faith  and  doctrine  is  in  this,  that  Catholics  beUeve  the  same 
doctrines  of  faith ;  to  which  it  is  no  obstacle  that  there  are  dif- 
ferent opinions  of  the  school,  which,  when  not  injuring  the 
faith,  the  church  permits  to  be  defended  for  the  elucidation 
of  truth,  and  the  exercise  of  the  schools,  which  are  pre- 
pared to  submit  their  opinions  to  one  judge,  the  Roman 
Pontiff  and  the  church ;  but  heretics  dissent  in  things  per- 
taining to  the  faith,  nor  do  they  acknowledge  any  judge  to 
whom  they  may  submit  themselves. 

"  There  is  also  in  the  church,  a  consent^  or  union  of  minds, 
like  the  union  of  sheep  of  the  same  fold,  and  like  that  of 
members  of  the  same  body.  The  same  is  readily  apparent 
from  the  communion  of  the  sacraments,  and  the  communion 
of  the  saints." 

We  do  most  cordially  embrace  the  doctrine  of  the  unity 
of  the  Church  of  Christ ;  we  believe  that  Christ  has  a  visible 
church  upon  earth,  constituting  part  of  the  Universal  Church 
to  which  the  innumerable  company  of  angels,  and  the  spirits 
of  just  men  made  perfect,  also  belong.  The  visible  church 
is  scattered  over  the  whole  earth :  but  every  man,  woman, 
and  child,  who  loves  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  keeps  his 
commandments,  is  a  member  of  that  church,  and  shines  forth 
as  a  constituent  part  of  Christ's  mystical  body.  Wherever  two 
or  three  true  believers  are  gathered  together  in  Christ's  name, 
there  you  have  a  particular  church,  inheriting  all  the  promises 
and  blessings  of  the  New  Covenant  as  fully  as  the  largest 
congregation  of  believers  upon  earth.  The  word  of  God 
designates  all  as  God's  children,  who  love  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ ;  into  their  hearts  he  has  sent  forth  the  spirit  of 
adoption,  whereby  they  cry,  "  Abba  Father,"  giving  them  m 
this  witness  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  the  seal  of  their  acceptance, 
and  the  pledge  and  earnest  of  their  heavenly  inheritance. 
By  whatever  name  they  may  be  called,  the  members  of 
Christ's  body  are  one  ;  they  love  the  same  Saviour,  they 


172   CONCERNING  MARKS  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

have  been  purchased  by  the  same  blood,  they  are  animated 
by  the  same  hope,  they  are  partaking  of  hke  precious  faith, 
contending  against  the  same  enemies,  and  pressing  forward 
to  the  same  eternal  and  glorious  home.  They  are  one  with 
Christ,  and  one  with  each  other.  In  the  great  doctrines  of 
the  Bible  involving  salvation,  they  agree  entirely.  There  is 
not  a  shadow  of  difference  between  the  evangelical  repentance 
and  faith  of  any  two  Christians  on  the  face  of  God's  earth. 
We  care  not  how  they  may  be  called,  they  are  addicted  to 
no  master  but  Christ,  whose  image  they  bear.  Let  a  Pres- 
byterian, or  a  Baptist,  or  a  Methodist,  or  an  Episcopalian, 
who  are  the  friends  of  Jesus  Christ,  be  thrown  together  by 
God's  providence,  and,  however  they  may  differ  in  minor 
matters,  they  will  all  testify,  that  they  love  the  Lord  who 
bought  them,  and  that  they  love  one  another  with  a  pure 
heart  fervently.  Names  of  human  invention  cannot  sepa- 
rate the  true  children  of  God ;  whenever  they  meet  they 
coalesce  like  kindred  drops  of  water,  and  are  one  in  heart, 
and  in  all  the  essentials  of  faith.  "  He  that  is  joined  to  the 
Lord  is  one  spirit,"  1  Cor.  vi.  17.  This  is  the  unity  which 
marks  the  Church  of  Christ ;  this  is  the  unity  for  which  the 
blessed  Saviour  prayed,  when  he  was  about  to  be  led  out  as 
a  lamb  to  the  slaughter.  I  admit  there  are  many  who  are 
the  professed  followers  of  Christ  who  manifest  none  of  these 
traits  of  Christian  character;  but  what  then?  all  are  not 
Israel  that  are  of  Israel ! 

There  are  tares  among  the  wheat,  and  there  are  hypocrites 
,  within  the  pale  of  the  visible  church,  just  as  there  are  un- 
fruitful branches  on  every  vine,  and  withered  limbs  on  every 
tree ;  and  yet  the  withered  limbs  and  boughs  cannot  affect 
the  unity  of  the  vine  and  its  branches.  In  the  time  of  the 
harvest  they  will  be  gathered  and  thrown  into  the  fire ;  but 
meanwhile,  we  leave  them  where  they  are.  Christ  never 
meant  that  his  church  should  be  distinguished  merely  by 
unity  in  matters  of  human  invention,  which  must  necessarily 


CONCERNING  MARKS  OF  THE  CHURCH.   173 

be  affected  by  circumstances  and  expediency.  Where  did 
ne  ever  say  that  his  church  was  to  be  under  the  government 
of  a  Supreme  Pontiff*?  The  word  of  God  tells  us  that  all 
power  is  committed  to  Christ  in  heaven  and  on  earth  ;  but 
it  nowhere  tells  us  that  the  Lord  Jesus  has  delegated  this 
power  to  the  Pope  !  The  Romish  Church  glories  in  her  uni- 
ty !  She  is  known  as  the  true  church  of  Christ,  because  she 
is  ONE.  She  acknowledges  but  one  head,  not  many  heads, 
—  and  that  one  head  is  Christ's  vicar,  the  Pope  !  1  We 
envy  her  not  such  a  head.  We  cleave  to  Christ,  the  living 
head  of  his  body  the  church ;  we  have  no  other  master,  and 
we  never  will  own  another !  God  is  our  witness,  by  his 
grace  we  will  ever  belong  to  the  Christian  but  never  to  he 
Popish  Church. 

Oh !  but,  says  the  Papist,  we  acknowledge  Christ  too  as 
the  Supreme  Head  of  the  church  !  Do  you  indeed  ?  So  you 
acknowledge  two  heads  ;  where  then  is  your  boasted  uni- 
ty ?  The  Church  of  Rome  claims  to  have  a  head  in  heaven, 
and  a  head  on  earth ;  we  glory  in  being  able  to  testify, 
One  is  our  head,  even  Christ! 

God  "  hath  put  all  things  under  his  feet,  and  given  him  to 
be  THE  Head  over  all  to  the  church,  which  is  his  body,  the 
fulness  of  him  that  filleth  all  in  all."  (Eph.  i.  22,  23.)  «  He 
is  the  HEAD  of  the  body,  the  church  ;  who  is  the  beginning, 
the  first-born  from  the  dead ;  that  in  all  things  he  might 
have  the  preeminence."  (Col.  i.  18.)  We  do  affectionately 
and  earnestly  entreat  those,  who  acknowledge  the  jurisdic- 
tion of  the  Pope,  in  the  language  of  Paul,  "  that  ye  hence- 
forth be  no  more  children,  tossed  to  and  fro,  and  carried 
about  with  every  wind  of  doctrine  by  the  sleight  of  men 
and  cunning  craftiness^  whereby  they  lie  in  wait  to  deceive ; 
but  speaking  the  truth  in  love  may  grow  up  into  him  in  all 
things,  which  is  the  head,  even  Christ."  (Eph.  iv.  14, 
15.) 

But  then  there  are  so  many  sects  in  the  Protestant  Church. 
15 


174       CONCERNING  MARKS  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

There  you  have  Methodists,  and  Calvinists,  and  Mormons^ 
and  Lutherans,  &c.  &c.  How  does  that  tally  with  the  unity 
of  Christ's  Church?  There  were  sects  in  Paul's  time;  one 
said,  I  am  of  Paul ;  another,  I  am  of  Cephas ;  and  another, 
I  am  of  Apollos ;  but  still  they  were  all  of  Christ  after  all ; 
they  addicted  themselves  to  one  teacher  in  preference  to  an- 
other, just  as,  in  our  day,  some  are  of  Wesley,  and  others 
of  Calvin,  and  others  of  Luther,  and  others  of  Zuinglius  ! 
And  we  need  to  be  reminded  as  Paul  admonished  the  Chris- 
tians in  his  day ;  was  Wesley  crucified  for  you,  or  were  ye 
baptized  into  the  name  of  Calvin  1  But,  whilst  we  acknow- 
ledge that  there  are  different  denominations  of  Christians,  we 
deny  that  there  is  more  than  one  true  church,  or  more  than 
ONE  true  Head  of  the  church.  All  believers  belong  to  the 
Church  of  Christ,  no  matter  how  they  are  called ;  just  as 
soldiers  of  the  same  regiment,  and  belonging  to  the  same 
army,  and  commanded  by  the  same  general,  may  fight  un- 
der different  banners,  wear  different  uniforms,  and  use  differ- 
ent weapons.  Notwithstanding  the  difference  of  sects,  the 
Church  of  Christ  stands  forth  **  fair  as  the  moon,  clear  as 
the  sun,  and  terrible  as  an  army  with  banners  ;"  and  this 
the  Pope's  church  knows  to  her  cost.  As  for  the  Mormons, 
whom  Romish  priests  take  pleasure  in  enumerating  among 
Protestant  denominations,  we  respectfully  decline  their  fel- 
lowship, and  we  would  advise  the  leaders  of  those  poor  dupes 
to  sell  the  golden  plates  and  the  copyright  of  the  book  of  Mor- 
mon to  those  persons  who  place  great  store  upon  vain  tradi- 
tions, and  who  believe  in  revelations,  subsequent  to  the  closing 
of  the  canon !  For  our  part,  we  should  not  know  what  to  do 
with  them,  as  we  do  not  deal  in  such  merchandise.  But, 
whilst  Romanists  cry  out  against  the  sects  of  the  Protestant 
Church,  do  they  not  forget  their  own?  There  are  vastly 
more  ♦sects  in  the  Romish  than  there  are  in  the  Protestant 
Church !  I  "have  before  me  a  work,  published  with  the  license 
of  th^t  most  Catholic  monarch,  the  Emperor  of  Austria, 


CONCERNING  MARKS  OF  THE  CHUJICH.        175 

which  contains  the  history,  with  painted  delineations  of 
some  hundreds  of  orders  of  holy  brotherhoods  and  holy 
sisterhoods,  of  monks  and  nuns,  black,  white,  and  grey. 
And  amongst  them,  there  are  some  denominations  of 
Christians,  who  have  stranger  names  than  any  of  the 
wildest  and  most  fanatical  sects  of  which  we  have  ever 
heard.  Thus  in  Biedenfeld's  history  of  the  different  orders 
of  monks  and  nuns,  we  read  of  the  "  Society  of  grey  peni- 
tents," founded,  A.  D.  1578  ;  of  the  "  Reformed  grey  sisters, 
at  Mens,"  founded,  1689  ;  of  "  White  penitents,  at  Avignon," 
and  another  brotherhood  of  penitents  of  the  same  colour,  at 
Lyons.  Then  there  are  "  Priests  of  the  holy  nail,  at  Suenia," 
founded  in  1567  ;  "  Blue  penitents  at  Rome,"  (1571 ;)  Black 
penitents  at  Rome,  (1577.)  « Tailor-brethren,"  (1647;) 
"Shoemaker-brethren  of  poor  Henry,"  (1645.)  "Daugh- 
ters of  the  childhood  of  Christ,"  (1657.)  "Brethren  of 
stillness  and  solitude,"  (1664 ;)  "  Sisters  of  stillness  and 
solitude,"  "  Sisters  of  the  child  Jesus,"  (1678  ;)  "Brethren 
of  the  child  Jesus,"  (1681.)  "  Daughters  of  the  good  Shep- 
herd," (1686.)  "  Nuns  for  the  continual  adoration  of  the 
Holy  Sacrament,"  (1653.)  "Congregation  of  the  conse- 
crated of  the  Most  Holy  Mother  of  God,"  (1832,)  &c.,  &c., 
&c.  These  are  selected  out  of  about  500  different  religious 
orders ;  and  are  presented  as  specimens  of  the  sects  of  the 
Romish  Church;  there  is  probably  much  more  difference 
between  the  blue  and  grey,  and  black  and  white  penitents, 
than  there  is  between  any  of  the  leading  evangelical  denomi- 
nations of  the  Protestant  Church.  And  certainly  amid  all 
the  dissensions,  which  have  disgraced  Protestant  Christen- 
dom, there  never  have  been  feuds  so  deadly  as  those,  which 
have  obtained  between  some  of  the  rival  orders  of  monks  in 
the  Romish  Church. 

A  volume  might  be  written  concerning  the  bickerings  and 
jealousies  between  the  Jesuits  and  the  secular  priests,  during 
Queen  Elizabeth's  reign ;  if  the  testimony  of  the  secular 


176       CONCERNING  MARKS  OF  THE  CHURCIi 

priests  is  to  be  believed,  the  Jesuits  in  those  days  must  have 
been  the  very  ofF-scouring  of  the  earth ;  and  if  the  Jesuits' 
declarations  are  worthy  of  credit,  the  secular  priests  were  as 
bad  as  themselves. 

As  for  unity  in  matters  of  doctrine,  it  will  be  as  easy  to 
persuade  Quakers  to  become  Episcopalians,  as  to  reconcile 
the  Dominicans  and  the  Jesuits ;  and  all  Protestant  sects  will 
agree  as  soon  as  the  Thomists  and  the  Scotists ;  Presbyte- 
rians and  Independents  will  unite  with  Episcopalians  far 
more  readily  than  the  monastic  orders  will  yield  thefr  privi- 
leges; Arminians  and  Calvinists  will  be  all  of  one  mind 
when  the  Jansenists  and  Molinists  are.  Our  controversies 
about  ceremonies  are  not  quite  of  as  much  importance  as 
those  which  are  waged  in  the  Church  of  Rome  concerning 
Infallibility.  We  find  some  theologians  of  the  Church  of 
Rome  contending  that  the  Pope  is  infallible,  others,  that  he 
is  anything  but  infallible  ;  some  insist  that  he  has  temporal 
power,  others  maintain  that  his  jurisdiction  is  entirely  spi- 
ritual. Some  maintain  that  the  Virgin  Mary  was  conceived 
without  original  sin,  others  affirm  that  she  was  not.  Some 
teach  that  souls  may  be  delivered  out  of  purgatory,  others 
hold  the  contrary.  The  advocates  of  these  various  theories 
have  written  and  railed  and  preached  against  one  another  in 
a  most  edifying  and  fraternal  manner.  Now,  when  the 
CHUECH,  the  infallible  judge  in  matters  of  controversy,  set- 
tles her  own  disputes,  it  will  be  time  enough  for  Protestant 
sects  to  invite  Holy  Mother  to  be  the  umpire  between  them  ; 
as  matters  stand  at  present,  we  must  decline  her  intervention, 
particularly  as  some  of  her  own  doctors  declare  that  the 
doctrine  of  the  Pope's  infallibility  is  heresy. 

Moreover,  the  unity  of  the  Papal  Church  has  been  sadly 
marred  by  schisms  between  rival  popes  ;  in  repeated  in- 
stances, there  have  been  several  competitors  for  the  chair  of 
St.  Peter,  and  if  there  is  any  virtue  in  anathemas,  then  many 
a  Pope  is  doomed  beyond  recovery.    Bellarmine  in  his  chro- 


CONCERNING  MARKS  OF  THE  CHURCH.   177 

nology  confesses  twenty-six  several  schisms  in  the  Church 
of  Rome ;  but  Onuphrius  computes  thirty ;  of  these,  some 
lasted  ten,  others  twenty,  and  one  fifty  years,  and  caused 
blood  to  flow  in  streams.  Oh  !  how  beautifully  does  the 
Church  of  Rome  preserve  the  unity  of  the  Spirit  in  the 
bond  of  peace;  and  with  what  lustre  does  she  shine  forth 
as  the  ONE  and  only  Church  of  Christ ! 

Concerning  the  Marie  of  the  Church  by  which  she  is 
called  Holy.  (No.  76.) 

"  That  sanctity  is  a  mark  of  the  Church,  is  proved,  Eph. 
V.  25.  *  Christ  loved  the  Church,  and  delivered  himself  up 
for  it,  that  he  might  sanctify  it ;'  hence  the  faithful  are  called 
by  St.  Peter,  1  Ep.  ii.  9,  '  a  chosen  generation,  a  holy  na- 
tion.' Add  to  this,  the  Apostles'  Creed,  in  which  it  is  said, 
*  I  believe  the  Holy  Catholic  Church.' 

*'  What  does  this  mark,  the  Sanctity  of  the  Church,  mean  ? 

"  It  means  not  only  that  Christ,  the  Head  and  Author  of 
the  Church,  is  holy,  but  also  the  sanctity  of  the  persons  be- 
ing in  the  Church,  the  sanctity  of  doctrine,  of  the  sacraments, 
laws,  &c.,  confirmed  by  miracles :  which  sanctity,  again,  is 
found  nowhere  except  in  our  church,  which  has  always  had 
men  conspicuous  by  their  sanctity,  whom  the  very  cham- 
pions of  the  Protestants  themselves  have  acknowledged  as 
holy  men :  as  is  to  be  seen  in  the  history  of  the  variations 
of  the  most  illustrious  Bossuet.  (Bk.  3.  n.  50.) 

"  Obj.  I.  Holiness  lies  concealed  in  the  soul :  therefore  it 
does  not  pertain  to  the  marks  of  the  Church,  which  ought  to 
be  visible. 

"  Ans.  Sanctity  is  not  so  concealed,  but  that  it  manifests 
itself  externally,  and  becomes  visible  according  to  its  effects  : 
just  as  the  mind  in  man  is  invisible,  and  yet  manifests  itself 
by  works :  and  although  the  sanctity  of  each  one  in  par- 
ticular may  not  so  certainly  be  known,  yet  we  see  the  sanc- 
tity of  the  church  in  the  community,  when  we  observe  some 
leading  an  austere  life,  others  devoting  themselves  entirely 
to  the  duties  of  piety,  &c.  Add  to  this,  that  God  frequently 
declares  through  miracles,  the  sanctity  of  private  individuals, 
which  beyond  the  church  is  never  done, 
15  * 


178       CONCERNING  MARKS  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

"  Ohj.  II.  In  the  church  there  are  more  bad  than  good  : 
therefore  it  is  not  rightly  called  holy. 

"  I  deny  the  inference  :  for  the  church  is  not  called  holy 
as  though  all  who  are  in  it  should  be  holy ;  but  because  all 
are  holy  by  their  calling  and  profession ;  and  because  many 
in  it  are  holy,  who  are  the  better  part ;  and  because  out 

OF  IT,  THEY  CANNOT  BE  HOLY. 

"  Besides,  that  there  are  bad  people  in  the  church,  does 
not  arise  from  the  doctrines  and  principles,  which  the  church 
proposes,  but  she  is  opposed  to  them :  but  that  heretics  are 

BAD,  proceeds  FRO^  THEIR  DOCTRINES   AND    PRINCIPLES  : 

for  the  doctrine  of  protestants  is  that  good  works  are  not 
necessary  to  salvation,  that  faith  alone  is  sufficient  for  salva- 
tion, that  human  laws  are  not  binding  on  the  conscience, 
&c." 

That  the  church  of  Christ  is  holy,  and  that  every  true 
member  of  Christ's  body  is  holy ;  in  short  that  there  can  be 
no  union  or  communion  between  Christ  and  any  soul  with- 
out holiness,  is  plainly  a  doctrine  of  the  word  of  God.  There 
are  many  in  nominal  connection  with  the  professed  people 
of  God,  and  in  the  outward  communion  of  the  church,  who 
have  never  been  regenerated  and  sanctified,  but  they  are  not 
members  of  the  church  of  Christ,  though  they  profess  to 
be.  The  church  of  Rome  claims  to  be  the  only  society  of 
true  believers  upon  earth.     Out  of  it,  men  cannot  be 

HOLY  ! 

We  are  prepared  to  assume  the  reverse,  of  this  proposition, 
and  to  prove  that  no  man  can  carry  out  the  principles  of  the 
Romish  Church,  and  be  holy.  Holiness  consists  in  the  love 
of  God  and  man.  Popery  is  the  enemy  of  both.  When 
did  the  Saviour  or  his  apostles  either  recommend  or  practise 
the  doctrines  which  it  inculcates  relative  to  the  treatment  of 
heretics  ?  They  endured  persecution  and  death  for  the  sake 
of  the  truth,  but  they  never  inflicted  either.  In  meekness 
they  instructed  those  who  opposed  them,  and  being  reviled 
they  blessed.  But  the  church  of  Rome  consigns  to  the  dun- 
geon  and   the  stake,  those,  who  cannot  violate  their  con- 


CONCERNING  MARKS  OF  THE  CHURCH.   179 

sciences  by  conforming  to  her  idolatry  and  impiety !  The 
sanctity  of  the  church  of  Rome  ! !  To  speak  of  her  as  holy 
according  to  the  principles  of  the  Bible,  would  be  resented 
even  by  her  own  priests  as  merciless  sarcasm.  Her  history 
.,s  an  accumulation  of  instances  of  cruelty,  lewdness,  per- 
fidy, superstition,  and  deceit,  such  as  the  annals  of  no  other 
power  present.  Surely  if  the  pope  were  really  Christ's 
vicar  upon  earth,  the  men,  who  have  filled  the  chair  of 
St.  Peter  would  have  been  addicted  at  least  to  no  flagrant 
violations  of  decorum ;  the  world  and  the  church  would  not 
have  been  disgraced  by  the  execrable  lives  of  some  of  the 
nominal  successors  of  Peter,  who  were  notorious  for  profli- 
gacy and  crime,  from  which  ordinary  criminals  recoil  with 
horror.  And  yet  every  one  of  these  men  bore  the  modest 
title  of  "  His  Holiness  ;"  and  thus,  we  have  the  strange 
anomaly  of  "  His  Holiness,"  being  at  one  time  an  adulterer, 
at  another,  a  murderer,  at  another,  an  avowed  sorcerer,  at 
another,  a  blasphemer.  The  instances  of  popes,  who  have 
been  merely  negatively  good  men  are  more  than  equalled  in 
the  number  of  those,  who  were  notoriously  bad. 

But  even  admitting  that  the  church  of  Rome  is  not  re- 
sponsible for  the  character  of  her  Supreme  Pontiffs,  how  is 
it  possible  that  there  should  be  holiness  in  that  church,  whose 
members  are  required  to  believe  and  endorse  such  blasphemy 
as  the  following :  "  The  faithful  must  give  to  the  Holy  Sa- 
crament of  the  altar  that  divine  adoration  that  is  due  to  God 
only ;  and  it  must  be  no  reason  to  prevent  this,  that  Christ 
our  Lord  gave  it  to  be  eaten !"  Council  of  Trent,  sess.  xiii. 
ch.  5. 

As  for  the  perversions  of  Protestant  doctrine,  which  are 
contained  in  the  closing  remarks  of  the  last  chapter,  one  of 
two  things  is  certain.  The  writer  either  did  not  know  that 
he  was  misrepresenting  the  tenets  of  Protestants,  or  he  did 
know  it.  If  the  former,  we  can  both  pity  and  pardon  him ; 
and  if  the  latter,  he  has  given  a  practical  illustration  of  the 


180       CONCERNING  MARKS  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

sanctity  of  the  Romish  Church.  "  The  doctrine  of  Pro- 
testants is  that  good  works  are  not  necessary  to  Salvation^ 
that  faith  alone  is  sufficient  for  Salvation,  that  human 
laws  are  not  binding  on  the  conscience,^''  &c.  Now  the 
poor  papist,  who  believes  whatever  his  holiness  or  his  reve- 
rence teaches,  will  naturally  infer  from  such  language  that 
we  Protestants  must  in  strict  conformity  with  our  principles 
be  Antinomians,  and  disturbers  of  the  public  peace.  But 
that  we  even  doubt  the  necessity  of  good  works  is  false. 
We  deny  that  good  works  merit  salvation,  either  in  whole  or 
in  part ;  but  we  affirm  that  the  faith,  by  which  we  are  justi- 
fied, works  by  love,  and  that  whenever  there  is  opportunity 
of  evidencing  the  existence  of  saving  faith,  it  will  be  proved 
by  the  holiness  of  its  possessor — and  we  always  testify  that 
the  faith  which  does  not  produce  good  works  is  utterly  worth- 
less before  God  and  man. 

The  assertion  that  Protestants  hold  "  that  human  laws  are 
not  binding  on  the  conscience,"  is  not  true  in  the  unqualified 
sense  in  which  it  is  stated.  We  are  bound  to  obey  God  ra- 
ther than  man,  and  if  laws  were  to  be  enacted,  which  in 
their  practical  operation  would  be  contrary  to  the  law  of  God, 
Protestants,  who  deserve  the  name,  would  mther  die  than 
yield  obedience.  But  all  governments,  which  leave  us  free 
to  worship  God  according  to  the  dictates  of  our  conscience, 
will  find  the  strongest  supporters  of  the  dignity  of  the  laws 
in  the  Protestant  portion  of  the  community.  If,  however, 
the  Church  of  Rome  should  ever  gain  such  an  ascendency 
in  this  country  as  to  obtain  the  control  of  the  secular  power, 
and  if  she  were  then  to  attempt  to  enforce  her  abominable 
rites  and  principles  by  a  political  arm,  she  would  find  Pro- 
testants resisting  her  tyranny  unto  death,  and  rallying  around 
the  standard  of  civil  and  religious  liberty  I  Protestants  will 
never  entrust  their  consciences  to  the  keeping  of  the  Church 
of  Rome ;  nor  will  they  ever  permit  the  Pope  to  make  laws 
for  them. 


CONCERNING  MARKS  OF  THE  CHURCH.   181 


Concerning  the  Mark  of  the  Church,  by  which  she  is  call- 
ed  Catholic. 

"  What  is  signified  by  the  mark  of  the  Church,  by  which 
she  is  called  Catholic? 

"  It  is  signified  that  she  is  diffused  over  the  whole  earth, 
or  is  universal  in  place,  people,  and  time ;  according  to  that, 
Apoc.  V.  9.  *  Thou  hast  redeemed  us  .  ^ .  .from  every  tribe, 
and  tongue,  and  people,  and  nation.'  But  it  is  universal  as 
to  place  and  people,  because  it  is  diffused  through  all  places 
and  nations.  It  is  universal  as  to  time,  because  from  the 
time  at  which  the  Church  of  the  New  Testament  began,  it 
shall  always  endure  without  any  intermission,  even  to  the 
end  of  the  world. 

"  But  it  is  predicted  that  the  church  would  be  such,  Ps.  ii. 
8.  *  Ask  of  me,  and  I  will  give  thee  the  Gentiles  for  thy.  in- 
heritance, and  the  utmost  parts  of  the  earth  for  thy  posses- 
sion ;'  and  Mai.  i.  11 :  '  For  from  the  rising  of  the  sun  even 
to  the  going  down,  my  name  is  great  among  the  Gentiles ; 
and  in  every  place  there  is  sacrifice,  and  there  is  offered  to 
my  name  a  clean  oblation  ;'  and  Matt,  xxviii.  19 :  *  Go  ye, 
therefore,  and  teach  all  nations  ;'  and  Acts  i.  8  :  *  You  shall 
be  witnesses  unto  me  in  Jerusalem,  and  in  all  Judea,  and 
Samaria,  and  even  to  the  uttermost  parts  of  the  earth.' 

"  That  this  mark  of  the  Church  is  peculiar  to  ours  is  plain ; 
for  in  every  place,  and  every  nation.  Catholics  are  found, 
who  all,  however  much  scattered,  are  united  under  the  obe- 
dience of  the  Roman  Pontiff:  also  have  been  in  every  time, 
and  will  be,  Catholics :  whereas  all  other  sects  are  confined 
to  some  part  of  the  world,  and  their  time  of  origin  is  easily 
shown,  which  they,  for  the  most  part,  also  betray  by  their  very 
name,  whilst  some  are  called  Lutherans,  others  Calvinists, 
&c.,  from  their  own  authors  and  inventors,  respectively,  &c. 

"  Obj.  I.  The  Mahometan  religion  is  more  widely  diffused 
than  the  Christian,  therefore,  &c. 

"Although  it  were  admitted  that  the  Mahometan  religion 
occupies  more  territory  than  the  Roman  Catholic,  yet  be- 
cause it  is  confined  in  the  Ottoman  Empire  only,  and  is  not 
found  in  other  parts  of  the  world,  it  cannot  be  called  univer- 
sal in  every  place  and  in  every  people.     Besides,  they  who 


182   CONCERNING  MARKS  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

preach  that  the  religion  of  Mahomet  is  so  widely  diffused, 
consider  it  with  all  its  sects :  and  hence  it  is  right  against 
them  thus  to  consider  the  religion  of  Christians ;  but  if  the 
Christian  religion  be  regarded  with  all  sects,  heretics,  and 
schismatics,  the  number  of  those  who  glory  in  the  Christian 
name  will  exceed  the  number  of  Jews,  Mahometans,  and 
idolaters  together. 

"  Ohj.  II.  The  Jews  are  scattered  over  the  whole  earth, 
therefore,  &c. 

"  Ans.  It  is  true  that  the  Jews  are  almost  every  where, 
but  by  the  dispersion  of  their  nation,  not  by  the  propagation 
of  (their)  faith :  and  hence  every  where  wretched  and  de- 
spised, they  bear  about  with  them  the  punishment  of  the 
blood  of  the  Son  of  God.  Besides,  there  was  no  necessity 
that  their  religion  should  be  either  scattered  in  every  place, 
or  embraced  by  every  nation,  like  the  Christian  religion." 

The  prophecies  of  Scripture  plainly  predict  that  the  Church 
of  Christ  is  eventually  to  extend  the  knowledge  of  the  truth 
as  it  is  in  Jesus  over  the  whole  world ;  and  the  Signs  of  the 
Times  evidently  point  to  this  great  and  glorious  consumma- 
tion as  near  at  hand.  The  wide  diffusion  of  the  principles 
of  the  Romish  Church  is  in  itself  no  proof  that  she  is  Catho- 
lic. Infidelity  prevails  to  a  fearful  extent,  and  is  to  be  found 
in  every  country  which  has  been  or  now  is  under  the  influ- 
ence of  Popery ;  but  the  simple  fact  of  its  diffusion  is  no 
substantial  argument  either  for  or  against  it.  The  Bible 
teaches  that  truth  is  eventually  to  prevail ;  the  kingdom  of 
darkness  is  to  he  finally  destroyed,  and  all  the  delusions  of 
the  Man  of  Sin  are  to  perish  with  it ;  and  the  providence  of 
God  plainly  indicates  that  "  the  time  of  the  end "  is  very 
near.  The  wane  of  Popery  throughout  Europe,  and  in  al- 
most every  part  of  the  world,  except  on  the  continent  of 
America,  and  the  corresponding  increase  of  Protestant  influ- 
ence, show  that  the  days  of  Popery  are  numbered.  France 
is  already  irretrievably  lost ;  and  even  Spain  is  bursting  from 
her  shackles ;  in  Italy  the  very  name  of  the  Pope  is  execrated, 
and  nothing  sustains  his  throne  but  the  bayonets  of  Austria  j 


CONCERNING  MARKS  OF  THE  CHURCH.   183 

whilst  the  great  cardinal  doctrines  of  the  gospel  as  taught  in 
the  word  of  God  and  the  Protestant  Churches,  instead  of  be- 
ing confined  to  sonne  few  corners  of  the  earth,  are  daily  prov- 
ing to  be  the  power  and  wisdom  of  God  to  the  salvation  of 
multitudes  throughout  the  whole  world.  The  missionaries 
of  Christ  are  proclaiming  salvation  through  faith  in  the  Re- 
deemer's blood  to  the  kindreds  and  nations  of  the  earth,  and 
the  mighty  angel  having  the  everlasting  gospel  to  preach,  is 
flying  through  the  midst  of  heaven.  Moravians  and  Metho- 
dists, Presbyterians  and  Reformed,  are  scattering  the  precious 
seed  of  revealed  truth  stripped  of  Romish  inventions,  and 
however  industriously  the  enemy  may  sow  tares  with  the 
wheat,  he  cannot  stay  the  approach  of  the  harvest.  It  is 
ripening  amid  the  snows  of  Greenland  and  on  the  burning 
sands  of  Africa ;  India  and  China  and  the  isles  of  the  Sea 
are  stretching  forth  their  hands  to  God,  and  we  look  and 
long  for  the  dawn  of  the  day  when  the  heathen  shall  be  given 
to  Christ  for  his  inheritance,  and  the  uttermost  parts  of  the 
earth  for  his  possession. 

Concerning  the  Mark  of  the  Churchy  by  which  she  is 
called  Apostolic,     (78.) 

V  "  The  fourth  mark  is  that  the  true  Church  is  apostolic, 
concerning  which,  as  Christ  says,  Matt.  xvi.  18 :  *  Thou  art 
Peter,  and  upon  this  rock  I  will  build  my  church  ;'  and  Matt, 
xxviii.  20  :  *  I  am  with  you  always,  even  to  the  consumma- 
tion of  the  world  ;'  likewise  the  apostle,  Eph.  ii.  20  :  *  Built 
upon  the  foundation  of  the  apostles ;'  and  ch.  iv.  1 1 :  '  And 
some,  indeed,  he  gave  to  be  apostles, — and  others  pastors 
and  teachers ;'  and  ver.  12  :  *  for  the  perfection  of  the  saints, 
for  the  work  of  the  ministry,  unto  the  edification  of  the  body 
of  Christ.' 

"For  what  reason  is  the  Church  called  apostolic? 

"  Aws.  1.  On  account  of  the  doctrine  received  from  the 
apostles,  the  same  which  our  church  always  has  received, 
and  always  will  receive,  so  that  from  the  time  of  thb 

APOSTLES  until  NOW,  IT  CANNOT  BE  SHOWN,  IN  WHAT  RE- 


184       CONCERNING  MARKS  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

SPECT,    WHEN,    WHERE,    AND    BY    WHOM    ANY    THING    CON- 
CERNING DOCTRINE  HAS  BEEN  CHANGED. 

"  2.  Because  it  was  propagated  by  the  apostles. 

"  3.  Because  it  has  a  legitimate  and  uninterrupted  succes- 
sion of  bishops,  especially  in  the  very  seat  itself  of  Peter, 
concerning  which  St.  Aug.  says  :  *  The  succession  of  priests 
from  the  very  seat  of  the  apostle  Peter,  to  whom  the  Lora 
entrusted  his  sheep  to  be  fed,  down  to  the  present  Episcopate, 
keeps  me  in  the  church.' 

"  4.  Because  she  adheres  inseparably  to  the  chair  of  St. 
Peter,  or  to  the  Roman  See,  founded  by  Peter ;  and  hence 
she  is  called  Papal  by  her  enemies,  &c. 

"  From  the  mark  of  the  Catholic  and  Apostolic  Church, 
it  will  be  proper  to  use  the  argument  of  Tertullian  in  his 
book  concerning  Prescriptions,  ch.  37,  and  to  accost  them 
in  his  words :  *  Who  are  you  1  When  and  whence  do  you 
come  ?  The  possession  is  tnine ;  I  possess  it  of  old,  I  pos- 
sess it  before  (you),  I  have  firm  origins  from  the  authors 
themselves.'  And  ch.  32.  *  Let  them  publish  the  origins  of 
their  churches,  let  them  develope  the  order  of  their  bishops, 
running  through  successions  from  the  beginning,  so  that  the 
first  bishop  shall  have  some  author  from  the  apostles  or 
apostolical  men.' 

"  From  these  remarks  you  will  gather,  that  novelty  in 
THE  CHURCH  IS  ODIOUS,  and  antiquity  venerable ;  and  there- 
fore that  the  antiquity  of  the  church  is  not  a  sign  of  debility 
or  defect,  but  of  strength,  firmness,  and  perfection." 

There  are  several  remarks  in  this  section,  which  are  cal- 
culated to  startle  by  their  boldness  even  those  who  are  pre- 
pared for  the  exhibition  of  no  small  degree  of  assurance  on 
the  part  of  Romish  writers.  There  is  not  a  greater  farce 
extant  than  the  pretensions  of  the  Papal  Church  to  apostoli- 
city,  as  we  hope  to  show  in  the  course  of  this  chapter.  We 
join  issue  on  the  following  proposition,  "  that  from  the  time 
of  the  apostles  until  now,  it  can  not  be  shown,  in  what  re- 
spect, when,  where,  and  by  whom  anything  concerning  doc- 
trine  has  been  changed." 

A  comparison  between   the   doctrines   taught   in  Paul's 


CONCERNING  MARKS  OF  THE  CHURCH.         185 

♦ 

Epistle  to  the  Romans  and  those  now  maintained  by  the 

Church  of  Rome,  and  prescribed  as  articles  of  faith  by  the 
Council  of  Trent,  will  suffice  to  show  the  impudence  and 
absurdity  of  her  claim  to  apostolicity. 

1.  The  Church  of  Rome  represents  the  Eternal  Father, 
the  first  person  in  the  Trinity,  under  the  figure  of  an  old 
man,  and  teaches  that  it  is  proper  to  bow  down  to  images 
representing  the  Deity.  Paul  condemns  it  as  heathenish 
idolatry,  and  as  entailing  the  judgments  of  God.  Rom.  i. 
23—32. 

2.  The  Church  of  Rome  teaches  that  the  Virgin  Mary 
was  without  sin.  Paul  asserts  no  such  doctrine,  but  on  the 
contrary,  affirms,  of  both  Jews  and  Gentiles,  that  "all  are 
under  sin ;"  and  that  "  all  have  sinned  and  come  short  of 
the  glory  of  God."  Rom.  iii.  9  and  23.  From  this  charge 
he  exempts  no  common  member  of  the  human  family. 

3.  The  Church  of  Rome  teaches  that  the  «  faithful"  are 
justified  by  works ;  Paul,  on  the  contrary,  proves  that  we 
are  justified  freely  by  grace.  "  For  we  conclude  a  man  to 
be  justified  by  faith  without  the  deeds  of  the  law."  (Rom. 
iii.  28.) 

He  tells  us  explicitly  that  Abraham's  faith  was  counted  to 
him  for  righteousness,  and  then  adds,  "  Now,  it  was  not 
written  for  his  sake  alone,  that  it  was  imputed  to  him ;  but 
for  us  also,  to  whom  it  shall  be  imputed,  if  we  believe  on 
him  that  raised  up  Jesus  our  Lord  from  the  dead."  Whilst 
he  uniformly  teaches  that  good  works  are  the  fruit  of  faith, 
he  as  uniformly  denies  that  they  can  have  any  share  in  our 
justification. 

4.  The  Church  of  Rome  would  have  us  believe,  not  only 
that  a  man  may  perfectly  fulfil  the  law,  but  also  do  works 
of  supererogation,  and  thus  make  Almighty  God  his  debtor, 
and  that  a  draft  upon  this  fund  of  merit  will  always  be 
honoured  by  Him.  Whereas,  Paul  in  all  his  writings  ac- 
cords with  the  doctrine  taught  by  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  that 

16 


186   CONCERNING  MARKS  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

when  we  have  done  all  things  that  we  are  commanded  to  do, 
we  have  done  no  more  than  our  duty,  and  are  unprofitable 
servants. 

5.  The  Church  of  Rome  teaches  that  holiness  consists,  in 
some  considerable  measure  at  least,  in  the  observance  of 
festival  days  of  her  own  appointment,  and  in  abstinence 
from  meats  at  certain  times,  under  pain  of  mortal  sin.  But 
Paul  declares  that  "  the  kingdom  of  God  is  not  meat  and 
DRINK,  but  righteousness,  and  peace  and  joy  in  the  Holy 
Ghost,"  Rom.  xiv.  17.  We  commend  this  whole  chapter  to 
the  devout  attention  of  those  "  who  command  to  abstain 
from  meats,  which  God  hath  created  to  be  received  with 
thanksgiving  of  them  which  believe  and  know  the  truth." 
1  Tim.  iv.  3. 

6.  The  Churdh  of  Rome  teaches  that  the  reading  of  the 
Scriptures  by  all  classes,  is  productive  of  more  harm  than 
good  ;  and  that  the  invariable  tendency  of  this  practice  is  to 
make  men  proud,  discontented,  and  conceited.  But  Paul 
tells  us,  that  "  whatsoever  things  were  written  aforetime,  were 
written  for  our  learning,  that  we  through  patience  and  com- 
fort of  the  Scriptures  might  have  hope."  Rom.  xv.  4. 

7.  The  Church  of  Rome  teaches  that  the  sufferings  of  the 
saints  upon  earth  are  worthy  of  eternal  glory.  Paul  affirms 
that  "  the  sufferings  of  this  present  time  are  not  worthy  to 
be  compared  with  the  glory  that  shall  be  revealed  in  us." 
Rom.  viii.  18. 

8.  The  Church  of  Rome  enjoins  upon  the  faithful  the  wor- 
'ship  of  saints  and  angels,  and  of  the  Virgin  Mary ;  and  pre- 
scribes that  the  same  veneration  be  paid  to  the  consecrated 
host  which  is  due  to  God  ;  and  that  divine  images,  holy  relics, 
&c.,  are  also  to  be  worshipped.  Paul  inculcates  the  con- 
trary, and  shows  that  the  judgments  of  God  were  inflicted 
upon  the  Gentiles  on  account  of  their  idolatry.  (Rom.  i.) 
He  never  desired  the  brethren  to  secure  an  interest  in  the 
prayers  of  the  saints  in  heaven  in  his  behalf,  but  he  be- 


CONCERNING  MARKS  OF  THE  CHURCH.   187 

seeches  them,  "  for  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ's  sake,  and  for  the 
love  of  the  Spirit,  that  they  strive  together  with  him  in  their 
prayers  to  God  for  him,"  &;c.  Rom.  xv.  30.  And  yet 
Peter  Dens  has  the  effrontery  to  assert  that,  "  from  the  time 
of  the  apostles  until  now,  it  cannot  be  shown  in  what 
respect,  when,  where,  and  by  whom,  any  thing  concerning 
doctrine  has  been  changed  ! !" 

With  Roman  assurance  those  are  challenged  who  ground 
their  faith  upon  the  word  of  God  alone,  and  who  "  build  upon 
the  foundation  of  apostles  and  prophets,  Jesus  Christ  himself 
being  the  chief  corner-stone,"  "  Who  are  you  ?  When  and 
whence  do  you  come?  The  possession  is  mine ;  T  possess  it 
of  old ;  I  possess  it  before  you ;  I  have  firm  origins  from 
the  authors  themselves."  Now,  that  the  Church  of  Rome 
may  have  "  firm  origins  from  the  authors  themselves,"  of 
many  of  her  strange  inventions,  we  are  not  disposed  to  dis- 
pute, but  the  apostles  certainly  are  not  the  authors  in  ques- 
tion. They  never  said  mass;  they  never  sold  indulgences; 
they  never  manufactured  holy  water;  they  never  worshipped 
images ;  they  never  imposed  penances ;  they  never  offered 
prayers  for  the  souls  in  purgatory,  &c.,  all  which  things, 
and  a  thousand  more  equally  impious  and  absurd,  are  prac- 
tised in  the  Romish  Church. 

But  we  are  farther  challenged.  "  Let  them  publish  the 
origins  of  their  churches,  let  them  develope  the  order  of 
their  bishops,  running  through  successions  from  the  begin- 
ning, so  that  the  first  bishop  shall  have  some  author  from 
the  apostles  or  apostolical  men."  Our  main  concern  is 
whether  the  doctrines  which  we  receive  and  preach  are  those 
which  Christ  and  his  apostles  taught ;  this  we  hold  to  be  the 
true  apostolical  succession,  and  this  is  all  the  apostolicity 
which  we  seek.  Yet  we  cannot  but  admire  the  zeal  with 
which  Romish  priests  insist  upon  their  apostolical  succession. 
Although  it  is  notorious  that  there  have  been  repeated 
schisms  in  their  church  ;  that  one  pope  has  anathematized 


188   CONCERNING  MARKS  OF  TUB  CHURCH. 

another,  and  has  in  turn  been  deposed  and  anathematized  by 
a  competitor;  though  the  line  of  apostolical  succession  has 
been  entangled  and  broken  by  the  acts  of  three  rival  con- 
temporary popes,  who  all  cursed  each  other,  and  mutually 
pronounced  their  ordinations,  and  all  other  official  acts,  in- 
valid, yet  forsooth  they  can  trace  the  order  of  their  clergy 
from  the  present  day  down  to  the  times  of  the  apostles ! 
A  hiatus  of  a  few  centuries  is  a  mere  circumstance  —  and 
the  occasional  breach  of  a  century  in  the  chain  of  apos- 
tolical succession  cannot  impair  either  its  continuity  or  its 
strength ! 

Besides,  when  we  come  to  the  investigation  of  the  practi- 
cal benefits  to  be  derived  from  this  boasted  succession,  what 
are  they  ?  where  are  they  1  A  Romish  bishop  professes  to 
confer  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost  upon  the  priest  whom  he 
ordains.  The  mere  imposition  of  the  bishop's  hands,  with 
the  proper  intention  by  virtue  of  the  apostolic  succession, 
imparts  the  Holy  Spirit  to  the  candidate.  He  rises  from  his 
knees  duly  ordained.  But  how  is  it  manifest  that  he  has 
actually  received  the  Holy  Spirit?  Is  he  a  holier  man? 
Has  he  become  more  apt  to  teach,  or  has  he  received  a 
single  endowment  more  than  the  Presbyterian  or  Reformed 
minister,  who  is  set  apart  by  "  the  laying  on  of  the  hands 
of  the  presbytery  ?"  Now,  if  he  has  received  no  additional 
gifl:,  we  cannot  conceive  of  what  practical  benefit  the  apos- 
tolic succession  has  been  to  him.  The  very  fact  that  God 
sets  his  seal  alike  to  the  testimony  of  all  ministers  who 
preach  the  gospel  in  its  simplicity,  is  a  standing  evidence 
that  the  residue  of  the  Spirit  is  with  him,  and  not  with  the 
Bishop. 

But  we  are  told  in  the  last  paragraph,  "  Novelty  in  the 
Church  is  odious."  So  it  is.  Peter  Dens  occasionally 
presents  important  truths  in  vigorous  language.  "  Novelty 
in  the  Church  is  odious,"  and  for  this  very  reason  we  abhor 
the  leading  tenets  and  principles  of  Popery. 


INFALLIBILITY  OF  THE  CHURCH.  189 

The  section  which  treats  of  the  duration  of  the  Church, 
we  omit,  with  the  general  remark,  that  we  hold  as  a  pre- 
cious truth  the  doctrine  that  the  Church  of  Christ  has  always 
been  preserved,  has  never  been  extinct  since  its  foundation, 
and  never  will  be  overthrown,  though  the  gates  of  hell  and 
of  Rome  should  move  against  it. 


CHAPTER  XXr. 
Concerning  the  Infallibilify  of  the  Church.     (80.) 

"  Is  the  Church  infallible? 

"  That  the  Church  in  matters  of  faith  and  customs  can  in 
no  respect  err,  is  a  doctrine  of  the  faith.  It  is  proved  from 
Malt.  xvi.  18.  'The  gates  of  hell  shall  not  prevail  against 
her,'  and  chap,  xxviii.  20.  '  Behold  I  am  with  you  always, 
even  to  the  end  of  the  world.' 

"  Observe  against  our  heretics,  that  they  indeed  admit  that 
the  Church  can  not  fail ;  but  then  they  recur  to  the  invisible : 
but  that  the  Church  is  visible,  has  been  already  proved. 
No.  73.  Besides,  1  Tim.  iii.  15,  the  apostle  says :  '  That 
thou  mayest  know  how  thou  oughtest  to  behave  thyself  in 
the  house  of  God,  which  is  the  church  of  the  living  God,  the 
pillar  and  ground  of  the  truth;'  there,  manifestly,  the  dis- 
course is  concerning  the  visible  church  ;  for  Timothy  is  not 
receiving  instruction  how  he  ought  to  behave  in  a  church 
which  he  did  not  see,  but  which  he  saw :  but  now  that 
church  is  the  pillar  and  ground  of  the  truth  ;  therefore  the 
visible  church  is  indefectible. 

"  Moreover,  a  twofold  infallibility  may  be  considered  in 
the  Church  :  one  active  and  authoritative,  which  is  called 
infallibility  in  teaching  and  defining ;  the  other  passive,  or 
obediental,  which  is  called  infallibility  in  learning  and  be- 
hoving. 

"  Infallibility,  considered  in  the  former  mode,  beVungs  to 
the  church  by  reason  of  its  head  or  supreme  F^M  ^^d  the 
16* 


190  INFALLIBILITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

prelates  of  the  Church ;  although  this  infallibility  does  not 
belong  on  account  of  the  laity  or  inferior  pastors;  for  just 
as  a  man  is  said  to  see,  although  vision  does  not  pertain  to 
him  by  reason  of  all  his  members,  but  only  by  reason  of  the 
eyes,  so  the  Church  is  said  to  be  infallible  in  this  way,  al- 
though this  infallibility  belongs  to  her  only  by  reason  of  the 
superiors. 

"  But  if  the  church  be  regarded  not  with  reference  to  her 
head,  but  as  she  embraces  all  the  faithful,  even  the  laity  un- 
der obedience,  she  ought  not  thus,  properly  to  be  called  in- 
fallible in  teaching  and  defining,  because  in  this  respect  her 
office  is  not  to  teach,  but  to  learn  and  believe :  wherefore  the 
church  considered  in  this  way  may  either  be  called  passively 
infallible,  or  in  learning,  believing,  practising,  &c. 

"  Hence  it  cannot  be  that  the  Universal  Church  obeying 
the  Pontiff  may  believe  something  as  revealed,  or  may  prac- 
tise any  thing  as  good,  which  is  not  such  :  and  hence  it  is 
commonly  said  that  the  opinion  of  the  Universal  Church  is 
always  true,  and  her  practice  or  custom  always  good." 

Concerning  the  authority  of  the  Church.     (81.) 

"  Is  the  Church  the  judge  of  controversies  respecting  the 
faith? 

"  Ans.  The  Church,  whether  assembled  or  scattered,  is  an 
infallible  judge  of  controversies  respecting  the  faith,  as  is 
plain  from  Nos.  68  and  80.  It  is  farther  proved  (thus) ;  if 
all  the  pastors  of  the  church  scattered  over  the  world  could 
teach  any  thing  false,  the  Christian  people  scattered  every 
where  would  also  be  bound  to  admit  and  believe  that  which 
was  false;  and  thus  the  error  of  all  the  pastors  would  be 
the  error  of  the  whole  church ;  and  so  even  its  passive  infal- 
libility would  vanish,  which  even  our  adversaries  themselves 
acknowledge. 

"  It  is  proved  also  from  the  practice  of  the  church,  which 
although  scattered,  has  condemned  many  heresies  without 
councils,  as  Eusebius  attests,  and  St.  Augustine  teaches,  (Bk. 
4  to  Bonifacius,  last  chap.)  '  As  if,'  says  he,  '  no  heresy  has 
been  ever  condemned  without  the  assembly  of  a  Synod  ; 
when  rather  those  (heresies)  are  very  rarely  found,  in  order 
to  condemn  which  such  a  necessity  has  existed  ;  and  there  are 


INFALLIBILITY  OF  THE  CHURCH.  191 

much  and  incomparably  more  which  deserved  to  be  disap- 
proved and  condemned  there  where  they  have  arisen.' 

"  To  whom  does  the  authority  pf  judgment  in  controver- 
sies respecting  the  faith  belong? 

"  Ans.  To  the  Superiors  of  the  Church,  namely,  to  the 
Bishops,  and  above  all,  to  the  Supreme  Pontiff. 

"  These  Christ  means  when  he  says,  Matt,  xviii.  17  :  '  Tell 
the  Church  ;  but  if  he  hear  not  the  Church,'  &c. ;  also  Luke 
X.  16:  'He  that  heareth  you  heareth  me;  and  he  that  de- 
spiseth  you  despiseth  me :'  to  these  also  Paul  says.  Acts  xx. 
28:  '  Take  heed  to  yourselves,  and  to  all  the  flock  over 
which  the  Holy  Ghost  hath  placed  you  Bishops,  to  rule  the 
Church  of  God.' 

"  Does  this  judgment,  in  matters  of  faith,  not  appertain 
to  theological  doctors,  or  other  ecclesiastics  ? 

"  Ans.  No :  and  hence  in  general  councils  they  have  not 
a  decisive  vote :  but  they  are  admitted  to  them  only  for  the 
examination  of  subjects  and  for  consultation ;  much  less 
therefore  are  laymen  judges  in  matters  of  faith. 

"  From  these  things,  observe,  the  government  of  the 
c?,arch  is  indeed  monarchical  by  reason  of  its  head,  the 
Supreme  Pontiff,  but  it  is  at  the  same  time  tempered  by  an 
aristocracy :  and,  because  there  is  likewise  a  subordination 
of  the  ministers  of  the  church  among  themselves,  hence, 
also,  it  is  a  hierarchy. 

"From  these  remarks  it  is  plain  :  that  this  is  a  vain  sub- 
terfuge of  the  Quesnellites,  who  say  that  the  Bull  Unigeni!us 
was  not  accepted  by  the  bishops  assembled  in  one  place : 
their  appeal  to  a  general  council  is  also  vain,  as  the  church 
dispersed  is  equally  infallible,  as  if  assembled  in  general 
council,  and  is  the  same  tribunal.  And  hence  not  even  that 
appeal  is  legitimate  according  to  the  principles  of  the  French, 
who  maintain  that  the  pope  is  fallible  and  inferior  to  a  gen- 
eral council :  because  from  an  infallible  judgment,  such  as 
is  that  of  the  church  dispersed,  no  appeal  is  admitted. 

"  Is  it  necessary  in  order  to  the  unshaken  and  infallible 
authority  of  a  definition,  that  all  the  bishops  throughout  the 
whole  world  should  be  of  one  and  the  same  opinion  ? 

"  No :  but  a  moral  unanimity  of  the  bishops  is  sufficient, 
or  the  greater  part  of  them  agreeing  with  their  head,  the 
Supreme  Pontiff. 


192  INFALLIBILITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

"  It  is  proved  (thus)  :  It  is  the  common  and  received  law 
of  all  tribunals,  that  an  opinion  be  pronounced  according  to 
the  plurality  of  votes :  but  here  a  plurality  of  votes  is  obtain- 
ed of  those,  who  agree  with  their  head,  the  Supreme  Pon- 
tiff: therefore  if  a  definitive  opinion  be  pronounced  by  them, 
this  is  the  legitimate  opinion  of  the  tribunal  of  the  whole 
church. 

"  This  is  confirmed  :  for  otherwise  the  church  would  fail 
and  be  rendered  invisible :  for  it  would  not  be  known  to 
which  party  it  would  be  right  to  adhere :  but  to  both  parties 
we  could  not  adhere,  as  between  them  the  unity  of  the  church 
could  not  subsist :  nor  could  it  be  known  which  church  was 
the  pillar  and  ground  of  the  truth. 

"Finally  that  smaller  number  of  bishops  dissenting  from 
their  head,  can  not  constitute  or  represent  the  church. 

"Hence  it  follows,  that  in  order  that  it  may  be  known 
that  the  whole  church  has  accepted  any  pontifical  bull,  it  is 
sufficient  that  the  greatest  and  the  principal  part  accepts  it : 
but  by  no  means  (as  the  Quesnellites  pretend),  is  it  neces- 
sary that  all  the  bishops  of  the  whole  world  receive  it,  in 
order  that  the  church  may  be  known  to  receive  any  doctrine 
as  Catholic,  either  to  propose  it,  or  to  condemn  the  contrary 
as  heretical. 

"  This  is  demonstrated :  (thus)  otherwise  the  church  would 
not  be  able  to  condemn  heresy,  when  some  bishops  were 
infected  by  it :  thus,  for  instance,  the  impious  doctrines  of 
Arius,  Macedonius,  Pelagius,  &c.,  couW  not  be  condemned 
by  the  church,  because  they  were  defended  by  many  bishops  : 
but  yet  the  decrees  of  the  church  against  said  heretics  have 
remained  firm  and  unshaken,  and  so  they  are  held  by  the 
Quesnellites  :  therefore,  it  by  no  means  obviates  the  condem- 
nation of  the  Quesnellites  that  some  bishops  in  France  have 
been  refractory  against  the  Bull  Unigenitus." 

Of  what  nature  the  consent  of  the  Bishops  ought  to  be.  (82.) 

"  Is  the  expressed  consent  of  the  bishops  required  in  order 
to  the  infallible  authority  of  a  decision  that  is  passed,  or  for 
a  definition  of  the  universal  church  ? 

"  No :  but  a  tacit  consent  is  sufficient,  bestowed  in  silence 
and  without  demurring,  after  the  decree  has  passed,  which 
has  sufficiently  come  to  the  notice  of  the  bishops ;  for  to  bo 


INFALLIBILITY  OF  THE  CHURCH.  193 

silent  in  this  case  is  to  consent :  for  an  error  to  which  no  op- 
position is  made,  says  Felix  III.  is  approved,  and  truth,  when 
it  is  not  defended,  is  oppressed.  And  St.  Augustine  (epist. 
119.  alias  55  to  Januar.  chap.  1 9.  n.  35,)  says  :  '  the  Church 
of  God  neither  approves  nor  passes  over  in  silence  those 
things  which  are  contrary  to  faith  and  a  good  life.' 

"  It  is  proved  2d,  from  the  sense  and  practice  of  the 
Church ;  for  many  heresies  have  been  condemned  by  the 
Pope  alone,  without  the  expressed  consent  of  the  bishops, 
and  yet  the  condemnation  of  these  has  been  considered  as 
an  infallible  decree  of  the  Church,  and  therefore  those  who 
dissented  have  been  regarded  as  heretics :  thus,  for  instance, 
the  condemnation  of  the  errors  of  Jovinianus,  made  by  Pope 
Siricius,  also  the  Bulls  of  Pius  V.  and  Gregory  XIII.,  against 
the  errors  of  Bajus,  are  considered  as  an  infallible  rule  of 
thinking  and  speaking,  although  few  bishops  have  received 
them  by  an  expressed  and  public  record. 

"  Observe,  independently  of  the  question  concerning  the 
infallibility  of  the  Pope,  that  it  is  certain,  that,  when  the 
Supreme  Pontiff  defines  anything,  and  a  plurality  of  bishops 
does  not  demur,  it  is  not  possible  that  that  definition  can  con- 
tain any  errors,  and  consequently  it  cannot  favour  the  Ques- 
nellites,  even  if  the  Bull  Unigenitus  had  not  been  accepted 
by  an  expressed  consent  of  the  bishops ;  although,  at  the 
same  time,  no  pontifical  Bull  has  ever  been  received  in  the 
Church  as  expressly  and  solemnly  as  this. 

"  Obj.  I.  Many  opinions  of  authors  are  circulated,  against 
which  the  bishops  do  not  demur ;  but  yet  they  are  not  sup- 
posed to  assent  to  them,  or  to  approve  the  same;  there- 
fore, &c. 

"  Ans.  I  deny  the  inference  :  there  is  a  disparity,  because 
the  doctrine  of  one  or  of  several  authors  is  not  published  as 
a  decree,  but  as  an  opinion ;  and  this  also  is  sometimes  not 
known  by  the  bishops,  nor  can  it  involve  the  faithful  gene- 
rally in  an  error.  The  case  is  different  concerning  a  Con- 
stitution of  the  Supreme  Pontiff,  pertaining  to  faith  or  cus- 
toms, directed  to  all  the  faithful  as  a  niodel  and  rule  to  be 
observed. 

*'  Obj.  IF.  There  may  be  various  reasons  for  the  silence 
of  the  bishops,  v.  g.,  the  fear  of  incurring  the  indignation 
of  Rome,  the  fear  of  the  tribunal  of  the  Inquisition,  or  also 


194  INFALLIBILITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

the  opinion  of  the  pope's  infallibility,  &c. ;  therefore  their 
silence  cannot  be  considered  as  consent. 

"  Ans.  Whatever  there  nnay  be  of  these  or  similar  nno- 
tives  for  silence,  the  inference  is  denied  ;  for  this  always  is 
firm,  that  the  Spirit  of  Truth  never  will  permit  that  the 
church  should  in  any  way  whatever  approve  any  error  in 
faith  or  customs,  lest  the  gates  of  hell  might  prevail  against 
the  church,  if  silent  in  such  a  manner. 

"  Wherefore,  observe,  that  the  infallibility  of  the  church 
does  not  depend  upon  the  question  of  giving  consent  from 
these  or  similar  motives :  because  infallibility  has  been  given 
to  the  church  absolutely :  not  as  if  the  church  could  proceed 
in  a  blind  way  in  her  definitions,  but  when  the  church  defines, 
it  must  be  undoubted  that  the  pre-requisites  also  have  been 
afforded.  Besides,  otherwise,  all  the  definitions  of  the 
church  might  be  called  into  question,"  &c. 

The  84th  section  treats  of  the  authority  of  the  church 
about  questions  of  fact.   The  main  proposition  is  thus  stated. 

"  It  is  to  be  premised,  2d,  that  a  threefold  fact  is  distin- 
guished :  for  one  is  immediately  revealed  ;  for  instance,  the 
incarnation  of  the  Word ;  another  is  merely  historical  and 
personal^  and  this  has  respect  to  the  truth  of  some  occur- 
rence, or  the  state,  condition,  inward  opinion  of  the  mind, 
crime  or  innocence  of  some  person  :  the  other  is  dogmatical, 
which  attributes  some  dogma  of  the  faith  to  some  book  or 
person. 

"  All  acknowledge  that  the  church  is  infallible  in  matters 
immediately  revealed. 

"  All  admit  that  the  church  may  err  in  facts  purely  histo- 
rical and  personal ;  and  hence  it  is  inferred  that  when  it  is 
asked,  whether  the  judgment  of  the  church  concerning  pro- 
positions or  books  is  infallible,  the  question  is  not  whether 
the  church  infallibly  decrees  that  this  book  is  this  or  that 
author's,  for  this  kind  of  fact,  the  church,  which  judges 
concerning  books  just  as  they  are  circulated  under  the 
name  of  a  certain  author,  supposes,  but  does  not  deter- 
mine," &c. 


INFALLIBILITY  OF  THE  CHURCH.  195 

Concerning  the  infallibility  of  the  Church  in  the 
Canonizaton  of  the  Saints.     (85.) 

*'  What  is  the  canonization  of  the  saints  ? 

"  Ans.  According  to  present  use,  it  is  a  solemn  judgment 
of  the  pope,  with  the  concurrence  of  the  church,  concerning 
the  sanctity  and  the  fruition  of  celestial  glory  of  a  departed 
person  with  the  provision  that  he  be  considered  by  all  as 
such,  and  be  honoured  with  due  veneration. 

"  But,  Beatification  is  a  permission  of  the  worship  of  some 
person  deceased,  in  the  communion  of  the  Catholic  Church, 
given  only  to  some  particular  places,  or  to  a  regular  order, 
until  his  solemn  canonization  may  take  place. 

*'  And  hence.  Beatification  differs  from  canonization. 

"  1st.  That  in  Beatification,  worship  is  only  regularly  per- 
mitted ;  in  canonization,  worship  is  decreed  by  enjoining 
through  a  definitive  sentence. 

"  2d.  Tnat  the  worship  permitted  in  Beatification  is  usual- 
ly confined  within  particular  places,  or  a  religious  family ; 
the  worship  of  a  canonized  person  extends  to  the  whole 
church. 

*'  3d.  And  principally,  canonization  is  the  decree  of  the 
Supreme  Pontiff,  ultimately  definitive,  concerning  the  sanctity 
of  a  deceased  person :  not  so  Beatification. 

"  But  because  the  canonization  of  the  saints  is  a  certain 
kind  of  fact,  the  question  is  asked,  whether  in  it  the  church 
is  infallible,  or  the  pope  1 

"  Ans.  The  doctors  commonly  aflSrm  with  St.  Thomas, 
&c.,  because  this  is  a  question  not  simply  of  fact,  but  of 
dogmatical  fact :  for  it  has  relation  to  the  customs  of  the 
whole  church,  which  would  thus  without  remedy  be  involved 
entire  in  a  superstitious  worship,  if  at  any  time,  one  should 
be  invoked  as  a  saint,  who  is  associated  with  the  damned  in 
hell. 

"  Ohj.  I.  The  sanctity  of  a  man  depends  upon  this  fact, 
whether  he  has  died  in  a  state  of  grace :  but  this  neither  the 
pope  nor  the  church  can  know.  No  one  short  of  a  divine 
revelation  can  know  this  of  any  man  living :  therefore,  &c. 

"  Ans.  I  deny  the  inference :  for  this  is  judged  from  vari- 
ous signs  and  miracles,  especially  after  the  decease  of  the 
person  to  be  canonized,  performed  by  his  intercession,  with 


196  INFALLIBILITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

the  superadded  assistance  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  which  in  a 
matter  so  grave  and  affecting  the  whole  church  preserves 
the  pope  free  from  error. 

"  For  the  proof,  it  is  to  be  said  that  it  does  not  belong  to 
the  rule  of  the  church  that  she  should  bear  testimony  con- 
cerning a  man  still  living,  who  may  also  continually  fall 
from  holin^s, 

"  Ohj.  II.  In  order  that  any  one  may  be  prudently  wor- 
shipped as  a  saint,  moral  certainty  seems  to  suffice ;  there- 
fore in  this  point,  the  infallibility  of  the  church  is  not  neces- 
sary. 

"  It  is  proved  before :  such  certainty  is  sufficient  for  any 
one  to  adore  the  consecrated  host. 

"  Ans.  There  is  a  disparity,  because  the  worship  of  Latria 
exhibited  in  the  adoration  of  the  host,  terminates  on  Christ ; 
and,  although  in  reality  through  want  of  valid  consecration 
he  might  not  be  present,  he  is  nevertheless  the  object  of 
adoration :  and  therefore  it  will  not  be  an  error  oAie  object, 
but  of  the  place:  but  in  the  worship  of  a  person,  who  should 
not  be  holy,  it  would  be  an  error  of  the  object. 

"  Is  it  to  be  believed  with  a  divine  faith  that  a  canonized 
person  is  a  saint  ? 

"  Ans.  This  is  not  clear.  To  Silvius,  in  his  controver- 
sies, and  to  various  other  persons,  this  thing  seems  not  to  be 
in  assured  confidence ;  yet  they  add  that  it  must  nevertheless 
be  firmly  held ;  so  far  that  to  say  that  the  Pope  can  err  in 
the  canonization  of  Saints,  is  scandalous,  rash,  and  smack- 
ing of  heresy.  Thus  also  thinks  Benedict  XIV.  lib.  1,  con- 
cerning the  canonization  of  Saints,  &c. 

"  Is  the  Church  or  the  Pope  infallible  in  Beatification  1 

*'  I  answer  with  Benedict  XIV.,  &c.,  that  when  the  judg- 
ment of  the  Pope,  in  Beatification,  is  not  ultimately  defining 
or  enjoining,  but  only  indulging  and  permitting,  it  must  not 
necessarily  be  infallible ;  but  it  may  suffice  that  it  is  certain 
with  that  moral  certainty,  by  which  the  Pope  acts  prudently 
and  wisely,  indulges  and  permits. 

"  Whoever  wishes  more,  let  him  refer  to  that  excellent 
work  of  Benedict  XIV.,  filled  with  every  variety  of  learning, 
which  is  inscribed,  Concerning  the  Canonization  of  the 
Saints.'''' 


INFALLIBILITY  OF  THE  CHURCH.  197 

The  arguments  by  which  Papists  attempt  to  prove  the  in- 
fallibility of  the  Romish  Church,  are  perfectly  ridiculous. 
They  tell  us  that  it  is  impossible  that  all  the  pastors  of  the 
church  should  at  one  and  the  same  time  depart  from  the 
faith.     Why  so  ?  Because  they  have  all  received  the  Holy 
Spirit,  and  he  is  a  Spirit  of  truth.     But  where  is  the  proof 
that  all  her  priests  have  been  thus  highly  favoured  1     Be- 
cause Christ  promised  to  give  the  apostles  the  Holy  Spirit, 
and  the  priests  of  the  Church  of  Rome  can  trace  the  valid- 
ity of  their  ordinations,  through  a  long  succession,  down  to 
the  very  apostles  themselves ;  and  because  the  Saviour  has 
declared   "  Lo,  I  am  with  you  alway,  even  to  the  end  of  the 
world,"  and  "  the  gates  of  hell   shall  not  prevail  against 
Aer,"  i.  e.,  the  Church.     But  now,  the  priests  ought  to  know 
that  these  promises  belong  to  the  Church  of  Christ,  and  not 
to  the  Church  of  Rome.     The  gates  of  hell  shall  never  pre- 
vail against  his  Church ;  and  he  always  will  be  with  his  peo- 
ple to  the  end  of  the  world ;  but  these  two  great  and  pre- 
cious truths  certainly  do  not  establish  the  infallibility  of  the 
Church  of  Rome.     Christ  has  never  promised  his  Spirit  to 
Aer,  and  to  the  papal  apostasy  as  such  he  never  can  give  his 
Spirit.     We  have  already  shown  that  error  abounds  without 
limit  in  the  Romish  system,  and  this  fact  is  proof  enough 
that  the  promises  which  Christ  has  given  to  his  Church  are 
misapplied  when  claimed  by  the  Pope  and  his  priests  for 
themselves,  for  according  to  their  own  theory  it  is  impossi- 
ble that  those  should  fall  into  gross  errors  to  whom  Christ 
has  given  the  Spirit  of  truth.     And  even  supposing  that  the 
Romish  Church  were  part  of  the  Church  of  Christ,  which 
we  utterly  deny,  the  texts  of  Scripture  which  are  adduced 
establish  her  infallibility  only  when  she  is  permitted  to  beg 
the  question,  and  assume  at  once  that  her  interpretations  of 
Scripture  must  necessarily  be  correct.     She  claims  to  be  the 
judge  of  controversies  respecting  the  faith ;  from  her  deci- 
17 


198  INFALLIBILITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

sion  there  is  to  be  no  appeal,  and  it  is  only  by  her  approba- 
tion and  authority  that  the  Scriptures  are  to  be  known  or 
received  as  authentic ! 

The  Church  of  Christ  has  four  special  offices  relating  to 
the  Scriptures. 

1.  She  is  their  witness  and  keeper.  If  a  friend  sends  a 
letter  to  us  by  the  hand  of  a  second  person,  and  he  delivers 
it,  we  do  not  credit  the  contents  for  the  sake  of  the  bearer, 
but  because  we  recognise  the  hand  and  seal  of  the  writer ; 
neither  do  we  receive  the  Scriptures  as  the  word  of  God  only 
or  chiefly  upon  the  recommendation  of  the  Church,  though 
conveyed  to  us  by  her  ministry. 

2.  The  Church  is  to  preserve  and  vindicate  the  Scriptures, 
to  exclude  that  which  is  spurious  from  the  genuine  word. 
And  to  this  end  the  Church  is  assisted  by  the  Spirit  of  Christ, 
through  whom  she  recognises  the  "  voice  of  the  Bridegroom." 
But  the  Church  does  not  make  the  Scriptures  genuine,  any 
more  than  the  jeweller  makes  the  gold,  whose  nature  he  de- 
termines by  his  chemical  tests. 

3.  The  Church  is  the  herald  to  proclaim  the  Scripture, 
and  is  bound  to  promulgate  it  just  as  she  has  received  it. 
Now  when  is  a  royal  edict  credited  for  the  sake  of  the  her- 
ald who  proclaims  it  ? 

4.  She  is  the  interpreter  of  the  Scriptures ;  she  must  ex- 
pound them,  without  mixing  any  thing  of  her  own,  and  ex- 
plain Scripture  by  Scripture. 

But  without  the  internal  evidence  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  the 
testimony  of  the  Church  will  be  of  little  efficacy.  The  Scrip- 
tures are  in  themselves  worthy  of  belief,  and  are  received  by 
us  as  the  word  of  God,  not  only  or  even  principally  be- 
cause the  Church  so  directs,  but  because  they  proceed  from 
God.  Now  that  they  do  thus  emanate  from  God,  we  know 
from  the  testimony  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  who  always  makes 
use  of  the  sacred  truths  of  God's  word  for  the  conviction 
and  conversion  of  sinners. 


INFALLIBILITY  OF  THE  CHURCH.  199 

We  know  that  the  Scriptures  are  divinely  inspired. 

1.  By  the  testimony  of  God  speaking  in  the  Scriptures. 

2.  By  the  inward  witness  of  his  Spirit.  "  We  have  re- 
ceived the  Spirit  which  is  of  God,  that  we  might  know  the 
things  that  are  freely  given  us  of  God."  1  Cor.  ii.  12 ;  and 
ver.  15.  "  He  that  is  spiritual  judgeth  all  things." 

3.  By  the  virtue  and  power  which  proceed  from  every 
page  of  the  Bible ;  by  its  pure  and  perfect  morals ;  by  the 
majesty  of  its  style ;  by  the  awe  with  which  it  inspires  the 
conscience ;  by  the  literal  fulfilment  of  its  prophecies ;  by 
its  admirable  preservation ;  by  the  harmony  of  all  its  parts ; 
by  the  rage  with  which  Satan  pursues  those  who  make  it 
their  rule  of  faith  and  practice ;  and  by  the  success  which 
has  attended  the  promulgation  of  its  principles. 

The  Scriptures  had  authority  with  believers  before  the 
judgment  of  the  church,  with  respect  to  the  canon,  had  been 
passed,  and  consequently  the  authority  of  the  word  of  God 
did  not  then  depend  upon  her  testimony.  The  judgment  of 
the  Fathers  is  comparatively  but  of  yesterday.  If  the  books 
which  the  Fathers  and  council  cite  as  canonical  were  not 
authentic  before,  then  for  several  centuries  there  was  no  au- 
thentic Scripture  at  all. 

If  the  authority  of  the  Church,  as  it  respects  us,  depends 
on  the  testimony  of  Scripture,  then  the  authority  of  Scripture 
does  not  depend  on  the  voice  of  the  Church.  But  it  is  plain 
that  the  Church  can  have  no  authority,  except  what  is  con- 
ferred by  Scripture.  If  I  ask,  how  am  I  to  be  sure  that  the 
Church  did  not  err  in  preparing  the  canon  of  Scripture?  a 
Papist  will  answer:  —  Because  she  is  guided  by  the  Holy 
Ghost.  But  how  shall  I  know  that  she  is  so  directed  ?  He 
replies  : — Because  Christ  has  given  a  promise  to  that  effect. 
I  ask,  where?  He  tells  me,  in  the  Scripture,  Matt,  xxviii. 
20,  &c.  "  Lo,  I  am  with  you  alway,  even  to  the  end  of  the 
world."  And  thus,  even  the  Papist  must  confess  that  it  is 
Scripture  which  gives  authority  to  the  Church. 


200  INFALLIBILITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

There  can  be  no  greater  or  more  certain  evidence  to  us 
than  that  of  a  divine  testimony ;  and  such  is  the  voice  of 
Scripture,  which  is  the  word  of  God ;  whereas  the  declara- 
tion of  the  Church  is  but  the  word  of  man.  If  the  authority 
of  the  Church  were  paramount,  then  the  truth  of  all  the  pro- 
mises of  salvation  would  stand  on  the  sandy  foundation  of 
human  judgment,  and  our  faith  must  ultimately  be  resolved 
into  the  voice  of  the  Church,  which  would  be  arrant  absurd- 
ity, and  gross  impiety. 

As  for  the  presumptuous  claim  of  the  Romish  Church,  that 
she  has  the  promise  of  the  Holy  Spirit  to  preserve  her 
bishops  and  pastors  from  error,  we  have  already  remarked 
that  this  promise  pertains  to  the  Church  of  Christ.  Every 
pastor,  and  every  private  member  of  that  church,  who  seeks 
the  aid  of  the  Holy  Spirit  in  fervent  and  believing  prayer, 
shall  be  guided  into  all  truth  necessary  for  salvation.  No 
man,  who  in  honest  simplicity  places  himself  under  the 
guidance  of  the  Blessed  Spirit,  and  asks  of  God,  shall  fail  to 
know  which  doctrine  is  divine,  and  what  he  must  do  to  be 
saved.  "  If  any  of  you  lack  wisdom,  let  him  ask  of  God, 
who  giveth  liberally  to  all  men  and  upbraideth  not,  and  it 
shall  be  given  him."  James  i.  5. 

According  to  the  Romish  theory,  her  bishops,  assembled 
in  council,  who  all  have  the  infallible  direction  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,  may  nevertheless  differ  toto  coelo  in  their  opinions 
and  decrees ;  and  the  decision  of  a  case  depends  upon  a  plu- 
rality of  votes,  though  all  are  equally  infallible !  Was  there 
ever  a  more  senseless  and  stupid  plea  set  up  in  behalf  of 
any  absurdity  ? 

The  contradictory  decrees  of  councils  have  made  the 
Romtsh  claims  to  infallibility  a  laughing-stock  and  a  bye- 
word  of  reproach.  The  contests  in  relation  to  image-wor- 
ship alone  are  sufficient  to  brand  it  as  a  gross  imposture. 
In  the  fourth  century,  the  Council  of  Elvira  decided  against 
the  practice;  thus  also,  in  754,  a  council  at  Constantinople 


INFALLIBILITY  OF  THE  CHURCH.  201 

condemned  image  worship  by  a  formal  decree.  In  787,  the 
Second  Council  of  Nice  declared  the  former  council  at  Con- 
stantinople to  be  illegitimate.  In  794,  another  council  re- 
versed this  decree  of  its  predecessor;  and  its  act  was  con- 
firmed by  another,  held  in  814;  but  in  842,  image  worship 
was  re-enacted. 

As  for  the  pope's  infallibility  in  the  canonization  of  saints, 
the  statement  ©f  a  few  facts  will  be  sufficient  to  show  how 
much  dependence  is  to  be  placed  upon  the  judgment  of  his 
holiness  in  the  manufacture  of  the  gods  of  Rome.  We  are 
struck  at  once  with  the  resemblance  of  the  canonization  of 
saints  to  the  deification  of  the  heathen.  Plutarch  tells  us 
that  "  the  ancient  priests,  in  order  to  the  credit  of  their  sys- 
tem, felt  it  necessary  to  persuade  the  people  that  certain 
characters,  many  of  whom  had,  however,  been  the  most 
ambitious  and  sensual  of  mankind,  were  honoured  by  the 
special  favour  of  heaven  ;  were  deep  in  its  mysteries,  and 
even  worthy  of  being  placed  among  the  gods  themselves ; 
in  consequence  of  which  their  public  deification  took  place, 
with  all  the  pomp  and  circumstance  so  well  calculated  to 
impose  upon  a  gross  and  idolatrous  people.  In  order,  how- 
ever, to  this  ceremony,  some  miracu^us  intimation  of  the 
favour  and  will  of  heaven,  as  to  the  individual  in  question, 
was  required  to  be  duly  attested  as  necessary  to  the  cere- 
mony. Thus,  in  the  case  of  Romulus,  one  Julius  Procu- 
lus  took  a  solemn  oath,  "  That  Romulus  himself  appeared 
to  him,  and  ordered  him  to  inform  the  senate  of  his  being 
called  up  to  the  assembly  of  the  gods,  under  the  name  of 
Quirinus."  In  papal  as  in  pagan  Rome,  the  evidence  of  mira- 
cles is  required,  with  this  difference,  however,  that  in  the 
case  of  the  pope's  idols,  the  miracles  are  alleged  to  have 
been  performed  by  the  saints  themselves.  The  matter  of 
procuring  the  necessary  attestations,  is  a  mere  trifle ;  hence 
the  canonization  of  saints  has  become  almost  as  com- 
mon as  the  creation  of  cardinals,  and  the  calendar  of  the 
17* 


202  INFALLIBILITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

saints  is  continually  enriched  by  the  addition  of  new  names. 
The  most  common  miracle  which  saints  perform  after  their 
death,  is  to  impart  a  delightful  perfume  to  their  carcasses ; 
and  it  is  an  especial  recommendation  if  they  can  preserve  it 
for  a  long  course  of  years,  so  that,  when  their  graves  are 
opened,  all  may  be  sensible  of  it.  Collin  de  Plancy,  (a 
French  author,  who  I  am  sorry  to  say  is .  not  much  ad- 
mired by  Romish  priests),  in  his  critical  dictionary  of  miracu- 
lous relics  and  images,  mentions  a  large  number  of  wonder- 
ful miracles,  which  are  duly  attested  by  reverend  monks  and 
others,  who  were  eye-witnesses  of  them,  or  at  least  said  that 
they  were.     I  will  translate  a  few  paragraphs  as  specimens. 

"  Victoria,  a  Roman  Martyr  of  the  third  century.  Her 
body  is  at  Monte  Sione,  and  at  Plaisance.  She  had  a  third 
at  Paris,  in  the  Convent  of  the  Daughters  of  God.  This 
third  body  was  sent  from  Rome,  in  1784 :  when  it  was  ex- 
posed, people  were  surprised  to  see  a  saint,  who  had  been 
dead  for  so  long  a  time,  preserve  a  fresh  colour,  and  a 
beautiful  skin.  Some  incredulous  persons  opened  other  eyes 
than  those  of  faith  ;  and  it  was  ascertained  that  the  Daugh- 
ters of  God,  in  order  to  hide  from  their  devotees  the  hideous 
spectacle  of  a  skeleton,  and  to  give  a  better  grace  to  their 
saintess,  had  covered  ihe  head  with  a  mask  of  silk,  and  the 
rest  of  her  bones  with  a  long  robe." 

*'  ViCTOE,  a  martyr  of  Marseilles,  in  the  third  century. 
Whilst  the  Emperor  Maximan  Hercules  was  in  this  city, 
Victor  overthrew  with  a  kick  an  altar  consecrated  to  idols. 
Although  he  was  an  officer  of  the  troops  of  the  emperor,  he 
was  immediately  arrested  ;  he  was  tied  to  the  tail  of  a  horse 
that  had  never  been  trained  :  this  punishment  did  not  kill  the 
saint ;  he  was  whipped  with  cowhides,  without  seeming  to 
feel  it ;  he  was  crucified,  without  appearing  in  the  least  in- 
commoded. As  he  sung  upon  the  cross,  they  put  him  in 
prison ;  during  the  night,  he  converted  his  jailors,  baptized 
them,  and  was  whipped  next  day  more  cruelly  that  the  first 
time. 

"  He  was  afterwards  led  before  the  statue  of  an  idol,  to 
which  he  again  gave  a  kick.     This  holy  foot  was  cut  off  by 


INFALLIBILITY  OF  THE  CHURCH.  203 

order  of  the  tyrants,  and  Victor  walked  not  a  whit  less 
straight  for  the  want  of  it.  They  were  obliged  to  put  him 
to  death  under  a  millstone. 

"The  remains  of  Saint  Victor  were  honourably  interred; 
they  possessed  in  an  eminent  degree  the  virtue  of  driving 
away  devils.  A  vast  number  of  blind,  deaf,  and  dumb,  is 
enumerated,  whom  he  cured. 

"At  Marseilles  there  were  formerly  sold,  bottles  of  holy 
water  in  which  some  bones  of  Saint  Victor  had  been  steeped. 
It  was  a  sovereign  remedy  against  all  sorts  of  diseases. 

"  The  body  and  the  head  of  Saint  Victor  are  at  Marseilles  ; 
but  he  had  a  second  head  at  Sens,  and  a  third  cranium  at 
St.  Victor,  of  Paris.  The  venerable  foot  with  which  Victor 
overthrew  the  idols,  is  also  shown  in  thrs  latter  abbey.  It  is 
said  that  he  has  a  second  body  at  Rome  in  the  church  of 
Saint  Pancrace,"  (Ssc,  &c. 

The  evidence  of  such  wonders  would  certainly  constitute 
some  recommendation  to  a  saintship,  but  unfortunately  it  is 
not  always  that  the  miracles  are  so  fully  attested  as  in  the 
present  instance.  I  am  aware  that  it  is  "  scandalous  and 
rash,"  and  that  it  "  smacks  of  heresy"  to  question  the  infal- 
hbility  of  his  holiness  in  the  canonization  of  saints ;  and 
therefore,  in  the  first  instance,  I  will  show  merely  that  the 
faithful  may  be  deceived.  Middleton,  in  his  Letters,  makes 
the  following  statements. 

"  The  Spaniards,  it  seems,  have  a  saint  held  in  great 
reverence,  in  some  parts  of  Spain,  called  Viar ;  for  the  far- 
ther encouragement  of  whose  worship,  they  solicited  the 
pope  to  grant  some  special  indulgences  to  his  altars ;  and 
upon  the  pope's  desiring  to  be  better  acquainted  first  with 
his  character,  and  the  proofs  which  they  had  of  his  saint- 
ship,  they  produced  a  stone  with  these  antique  letters, 
S.  VIAR,  which  the  antiquaries  readily  saw  to  be  a  small 
fragment  of  some  old  Roman  inscription  in  memory  of  one 
who  had  been  Prefectu  s.  viARwm,  or  overseer  of  the  high- 
ways." ■• 

"We  have  in  England,"  says  Middleton,  "an  instance 
still  more  ridiculous,  of  a  fictitious  saintship,  in  the  case  of  a 


INFALLIBILITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

certain  saint,  called  Amphibolus,  who,  according  to  monkish 
historians,  was  bishop  of  the  Isle  of  Man,  and  fellow-martyr 
and  disciple  of  St.  Alban ;  yet  the  learned  Bishop  Usher  has 
given  good  reason  to  convince  us  that  he  owes  the  honour 
of  his  saintship  to  a  mistaken  passage  in  old  acts  or  legends 
of  St.  Alban ;  where  the  Amphibolus,  mentioned  and  since 
reverenced  as  a  saint  and  martyr,  was  nothing  more  than  a 
cloak  which  Alban  happened  to  have  at  the  time  of  his  exe- 
cution ;  being  a  word  derived  from  the  Greek,  and  signifying 
a  rough,  shaggy  cloak,  which  ecclesiastical  persons  usually 
wore  in  that  age." 

All  this,  however,  does  not  necessarily  affect  the  pope's 
infallibility  ;  because  we  have  not  proved  that  his  holiness 
had  really  canonized  the  cloak  in  question ;  but,  however 
loth  I  am  to  soil  my  pages  with  any  thing  that  is  really 
"  scandalous,  rash,  and  smacking  of  heresy,"  I  may  as  well 
say  at  once  that  his  holiness's  infallibility  in  this  respect  is 
at  least  suspected.  The  same  author  to  whom  I  have  just 
referred,  says  farther : 

"  They  pretend  to  show  here  at  Rome,  two  original  im- 
pressions of  our  Saviour's  face,  on  two  different  handker- 
chiefs;  the  one,  sent  a  present  by  himself  to  Agbarus, 
prince  of  Edessa,  who  by  a  letter  had  desired  a  picture  of 
him  ,•  the  other,  given  by  him  at  the  time  of  his  execution, 
to  a  saint  or  holy  woman,  named  Veronica,  upon  a  hand- 
kerchief which  she  had  lent  him  to  wipe  his  face  on  that 
occasion ;  both  of  which  handkerchiefs  are  still  preserved, 
as  they  affirm,  and  now  kept  with  much  reverence ;  the  first 
m  St.  Sylvester's  church,  the  second  in  St.  Peter's ;  where 
in  honour  of  this  sacred  relic,  there  is  a  fine  altar,  built  by 
Pope  Urban  VIII.,  with  a  statue  of  Veronica  herself  with  an 
inscription.  There  is  a  prayer  in  their  book  of  offices, 
ordered  by  the  rubric,  to  be  addressed  to  this  sacred  and  mi- 
raculous picture,  in  the  following  terms ;  '  Conduct  us,  O 
thou  blessed  figure !  to  our  proper  home,  where  we  may 
behold  the  pure  face  of  Christ.'  But  notwithstanding  the 
authority  of  their  popes,  and  this  inscription,  this  Veronica, 
as  one  of  their  best  authors  has  shown,  like  Amphibolus 


INFALLIBILITY  OF  THE  CHURCH.  205 

before  mentioned,  was  not  any  real  person,  but  the  name 
given  to  the  picture  itself  by  old  writers  who  mention  it ; 
being  formed  by  blundering  and  confounding  the  words, 
VERA  Icon,  or  true  image,  the  title  inscribed  perhaps,  or 
given  originally  to  the  handkerchief  by  the  first  contrivers 
of  the  imposture.  '  Haec  Christi  imago  a  recentioribus 
"Veronicse  dicitur :  imaginem  ipsam  veteres  Veronicam  ap- 
pellabant,'  &c.  Mabill.  Iter.  Ital.  p.  88.  '  This  picture  of 
Christ  is  called  Veronica's  by  more  recent  (writers) ;  the 
ancients  called  the  picture  itself  Veronica.'" 

It  is  certain  that  not  a  few  of  the  saints  whom  Papists  de- 
voutly invoke,  never  had  any  existence  at  all,  and  some  who 
4[d  live  were  persons  of  very  doubtful  reputation. 

On  the  21st  of  October,  they  who  follow  the  Romish 
calender,  make  mention  of  St.  Ursula  and  the  11,000  virgins, 
in  these  words :  —  "  Permit  us,  we  pray  thee,  O  Lord  our 
God,  to  venerate  with  unceasing  devotion  the  triumphs  of  the 
holy  virgins  and  martyrs,  Ursula  and  her  companions ;  &c."* 
And  yet  some  Romish  authors  doubt  the  authenticity  of  her 
story  ;  and  well  they  may.  For  why  so  many  virgins  should 
ramble  away  from  Cornwall  to  Rome,  without  any  business, 
is  certainly  hard  to  determine ;  and  still  more  difficult  is  it 
to  say  what  motive  the  Huns  should  have  had  for  putting 
them  all  to  death.  It  is  said  also  that  Pope  Cyriacus  went 
with  them,  and  yet  Baronius  denies  that  there  ever  was  a 
Pope  of  that  name. 

So  on  July  ^7th,  some  simple  souls  pray  to  the  Seven 
Sleepers,  and  worship  them  as  saints.  But  any  one  who  can 
believe  that  they  slept  in  a  cave  from  the  time  of  Decius  to 
the  reign  of  Theodosius,  a  period  of  362  years,  and  then,  to 
confute  some  heretics  that  denied  the  resurrection,  woke  up 
and  looked  as  fresh  as  a  rose,  certainly  deserves  to  be  canon- 
ized as  an  eighth  sleeper.  What  confirmation  the  doctrine 
of  the  general  resurrection  could  derive  from  the  sleep  of 

»  See  Breviarium  Monasticum  of  Popo  Paul  V.  p.  G76.  Paris,  1671. 


208  ECCLESIASTICAL  COUNCILS. 

these  seven  persons,  who  it  seems  were  not  really  dead,  of 
course  is  not  for  heretics  to  conceive. 

St.  George  is  also  a  renowned  saint,  and  yet  his  very  ex- 
istence is  problematical.  St.  Christopher,  one  author  tells 
us,  was  a  gentleman  who  measured  just  twelve  feet,  but  an- 
other veracious  historian  stretches  his  stature  to  twelve  cubits 
that  is  at  least  eighteen  feet.  This  tall  saint  converted 
just  48,000  Gentiles  to  Christianity ;  and  it  is  further  reported 
of  him,  that  he  carried  Christ  over  an  arm  of  the  sea  on  his 
back. 

On  the  15th  of  March,  St.  Longinus  receives  due  venera- 
tion. This  is  the  Roman  soldier  who  pierced  the  Saviour's 
side. 

The  29th  of  March  is  the  day  of  Marcus  Arethusius ;  yet 
Baronius  condemns  him  as  an  Arian  heretic. 

Thomas  a  Becket,  the  wicked  Archbishop  of  Canterbury, 
is  invoked  in  Latin  verses  to  this  effect : 

*'  By  that  same  blood  shed  for  thee,  O  Thomas, 
Christ,  raise  us  to  that  place  to  which  he  has  ascended !" 

And  yet  history  represents  this  saint  as  a  vile  traitor  to  his 
country.  And  though  we  do  not  justify  the  manner  of  his 
death,  all  that  can  be  said  in  his  favour  is,  that  he  died  the 
Pope's  martyr. 


CHAPTER  XXII. 

Concerning  Ecclesiastical  Councils.     (86.) 

"  What  is  meant  by  an  ecclesiastical  council  1 
"  An  assembly  of  the  chief  priests  or  ecclesiastical  rulers, 
convened  by  legitimate  authority,  in  order  that  the  opinions 
concerning  things  pertaining  to  the  church  being  collected 
into  one,  that  is,  concerning  faith,  customs,  or  discipline,  it 
may  be  determined  what  is  to  be  thought  or  done. 
"  How  are  ecclesiastical  councils  divided  ? 


ECCLESIASTICAL  COUNCILS.  207 

"  They  are  usually  divided  into  four  kinds,  viz.,  into  dm- 
cesan,  provincial,  national,  and  general, 

"  A  DicBcesan  is  that  which  the  Bishop  celebrates  with  the 
clergy  of  his  own  diocese. 

"  A  Provincial  is  that  which  is  celebrated  by  the  Bishops 
of  some  ecclesiastical  province,  their  Archbishop  or  Metro- 
politan being  president. 

"  That  is  called  National  to  which  the  Archbishops  and 
Bishops  of  a  single  kingdom  or  nation  are  convoked,  the 
Patriarch  or  Primate  of  that  nation  presiding. 

"  A  General  council  is  that  to  which  the  Bishops  of  the 
whole  world  are  assembled,  and  over  which  the  Pope  him- 
self presides,  either  in  his  own  person  or  by  his  legates :  it 
is  called  also  universal,  oecumenical,  and  also  plenary. 

"  Among  the  ancients  a  national  council  is  sometimes  also 
called  plenary  and  universal ;  because  it  is  such  as  to  the 
kingdom  and  nation,  although  it  is  not  absolutely  such." 

In  order  to  a  general  council  it  is  not  necessary  that  all 
the  Bishops  should,  without  exception,  be  present.  Some- 
times a  National  is  more  numerous  than  a  General  council. 
Thus  at  the  first  Constantinopolitan  council  there  were  not 
more  than  150  Bishops  present ;  whereas  the  National  Car- 
thaginian Synod,  at  which  St.  Augustine  was  present,  con- 
sisted of  217  Bishops. 

It  is  sufficient  that  it  be  lawfully  assembled  out  of  the 
whole  Christian  world. 

"  By  right.  Bishops  alone  should  be  called  to  a  General 
Council,  and  they  are  present  by  divine  right  as  ordinary 
judges,  who,  therefore,  alone  have  by  right  a  decisive  vote. 
This  is  proved  from  the  fact  that  Christ  entrusted  to  them 
the  government  of  the  church,  according  to  Acts  xx.  28 : 
*  Take  heed  to  yourselves  and  to  all  the  flock  over  which  the 
Holy  Ghost  hath  placed  you  Bishops,  to  rule  the  Church  of 
God.' 

"  Therefore  Bishops  in  councils  are  as  judges,  and  not 
only  as  counsellors  of  the  Pope,  and  therefore  they  are  ac- 
customed to  use  these  words,  *  We  decree,  we  resolve,'  &c., 
and  as  decreeing  they  subscribe  the  council :  hence  also  the 
things  defined  in  councils  are  not  wont  to  be  called  decrees 
of  the  Pope  but  of  the  council. 

**  Observe,  however,  that  the  Supreme  Pontiflf  is  not  obliged 


208  ECCLESIASTICAL  COUNCILS. 

to  follow  the  greater  part  of  the  Bishops  in  delivering  his 
opinion,  for  although  the  Bishops  are  true  judges,  yet  the 
supreme  judgment  has  been  committed  by  Christ  to  his  vicar 
upon  earth,  and  has  been  entrusted  to  him  that  he  may  con- 
firm and  direct  his  brethren :  and  thus  a  king  is  not  obliged 
to  follow  the  greater  part  of  the  judges. 

"  Observe,  that  by  privilege,  Cardinals  who  are  not  Bish- 
ops, and  certain  Abbots,  and  the  Chiefs  of  Regular  Orders, 
may  be  present  at  councils  as  judges,  and  have  a  decisive 
vote,"  &c. 

From  No.  87  we  learn  that  it  is  the  Pope's  right  to  con- 
voke a  general  council,  to  continue  and  dissolve  it,  and  to 
preside  over  it,  and  approve  its  proceedings.  Whenever  Em- 
perors presided  at  Oriental  councils,  their  presidency  was  not 
authoritative  but  honorary :  they  were  there  merely  as  fa- 
vourers, defenders,  and  witnesses  of  those  things  which  were 
done.  When  they  subscribed  the  decrees  of  councils,  they 
did  it  not  as  decreeing,  but  as  consenting,  as  witnesses,  and 
as  obeying. 

"  It  also  belongs  to  the  Supreme  Pontiff  to  approve  gene- 
ral councils  as  such,  when  he  is  not  personally  present  at 
them  :  so  that  without  his  approbation,  they  cannot  have  the 
authority  of  a  general  council :  and  therefore  we  find  it  re- 
corded that  general  councils,  and  the  Council  of  Trent  itself 
so  earnestly  sought  confirmation  from  the  Apostolic  See. 

"If  the  Pope  presides  by  legates,  then,  if  the  legates  have 
instructions  from  the  Pope,  concerning  questions  to  be  set- 
tled, and  follow  them  according  to  the  rule  in  decreeing  with 
the  council,  then  this  council  appears  to  be  firm  and  infalli- 
ble before  the  Pope's  confirmation ;  however  then,  there  is 
in  so  far  need  of  confirmation,  that  there  may  be  no  dispute 
concerning  the  legitimacy  of  the  council,  and  the  consent 
and  approbation  of  the  Supreme  Pontiff;  but  if  the  legates 
either  have  no  instruction,  or  do  not  follow  it,  then  whatever 
the  council  defines  is  not  of  infallible  authority  before  the 
pontifical  confirmation. 

"  Hence  arises  another  division  of  councils,  by  which 
some  are  called  approved,  others  reprobated  or  rejected,  some 
partly  approved,  partly  rejected  ;  others  neither  approved  nor 
reprobated." 


ECCLESIASTICAL  COUNCILS.  209 


Concerning  approved  General  Councils.     (88.) 

"  The  approved  general  councils  from  the  time  of  the  apos- 
tles number  eighteen. 

"  The  first  is  the  First  Nicene  Council,  celebrated  in  the 
year  325,  under  St.  Sylvester,  at  which  318  Fathers  were 
present,  in  which  it  was  definitely  settled  against  Arius  and 
his  followers,  denying  the  divinity  of  the  Son,  that  in  divine 
things,  the  Son  is  consubstantial  with  the  Father,  &c. 

*'  The  Sardicensian  council  under  Julius  I.,  which  is  usu- 
ally considered  as  an  appendix  of  the  Nicene  council,  fol- 
lowed in  confirmation  of  this  Synod  in  the  year  347,  &c. 

"  The  second  is  the  First  Constantinopolitan,  in  the  year 
381,  assembled  under  St.  Damasus,  at  which  150  Bishops 
were  present.  Gregory  Nazianzen,  the  Prefect  of  the  Con- 
stantinopolitan  Church,  presided  partly,  and  partly  also  Nec- 
tarius,  Gregory's  successor,  in  the  Constantinopolitan  See. 
In  this,  the  Nicene  faith  was  confirmed,  and  the  heresy  of 
Macedonius  who  denied  the  divinity  of  the  Holy  Spirit  was 
condemned ;  and  hence  to  the  Nicene  Symbol  those  things 
were  added  in  this  council,  which  pertain  to  the  divinity  of 
the  Holy  Spirit. 

"  The  third  is  the  Ephesian,  in  the  year  431,  held  under 
S.  Coelestinus,  in  which  more  than  200  Bishops  were  num- 
bered ;  and  Nestorius,  the  Constantinopolitan  Bishop,  was 
condemned,  asserting  two  persons  in  Christ,  a  divine  and  a 
human,  and  consequently  denying  that  the  divine  Virgin  is 
the  mother  of  God. 

"The  fourth  is  the  Chalcedonian,  oC  Q30  Bishops,  and 
convened  A.  D.  451,  under  St.  Leon,  in  which  Eutyches 
was  condemned,  teaching  that  there  was  only  one  nature  in 
Christ  combined  from  a  divine  and  human  nature. 

"  The  fifth  is  the  Second  Constantinopolitan,  A.  D.  553, 
under  Vigilius,  celebrated  by  255  Bishops,  in  which  the  Nes- 
torian  and  Eutychian  heresies  were  again  condemned  with 
three  renowned  chapters,  and  the  errors  of  Origen  rejected. 
"  The  sixth  is  the  Third  Constantinopolitan,  under  St. 
Agatho,  of  299  Bishops,  begun  A.  D.  680 ;  in  this  the  her- 
esy of  the  Monothclites  was  condemned,  professing  that 
18 


210  ECCLESIASTICAL  COUNCILS. 

there  was  but  one  will  and  operation  in  Christ,  and  thus  re- 
storing the  heresy  of  Eutyches. 

"  The  seventh  is  the  Second  Nicene,  of  350  Bishops,  A. 
D.  787,  under  Adrian  I.,  celebrated  against  the  Iconoma- 
chists,  or  Iconoclasts,  i.  e.,  the  assailers  of  the  images  of 
Christ  and  the  Saints. 

"  The  eighth  is  the  Fourth  Constantinopolitan,  A.  D.  869, 
held  under  Adrian  II.,  at  which  383  Bishops  assembled :  in 
this  thieir  own  honour  and  worship  was  restored  to  the  sa- 
cred images,  and  Photius,  a  most  crafty  man,  and  who  had 
intruded  himself  into  the  patriarchate  of  Constantinople,  was 
deposed  ;  by  his  persuasion  and  influence  the  Greeks  began 
to  assail  the  primacy  of  the  Supreme  Pontiff,  and  to  follow 
the  Latins  with  deadly  hatred,  turning  many  things  into  ac- 
cusation against  them,  and  particularly  that  they  taught  that 
the  Holy  Spirit  proceeds  from  the  Father  and  from  the  Son, 
and  that  they  had  added  the  words  '  and  from  the  Son'  to  the 
Constantinopolitan  creed ;  and  hence  that  foul  schism  of  the 
Greeks  took  its  origin. 

"  No  general  councils  were  afterwards  held  in  the  East : 
the  others  were  celebrated  in  the  West. 

"  The  ninth  general  council  is  the  First  Lateran,  A.  D. 
1123,  celebrated  under  Calixtus  II.,  in  order  to  obviate  a 
grievous  dissension  between  the  popes  and  emperors  con- 
cerning the  right  of  investiture,  which  concerned  the  institu- 
tions of  the  bishops,  chief  priests,  and  those  who  held  bene- 
fices: this  right  the  emperors  arrogated  to  themselves;  but 
the  popes  wished  this  to  be  reserved  to  the  church.  In  the 
same  council,  provision  was  made  for  affording  supplies  to 
the  holy  land  and  Spain  against  the  Saracens.  There  were 
present  more  than  300  bishops. 

"The  tenth  is  the  Second  Lateran,  A.  D.  1139,  held 
under  Innocent  II.,  by  about  1000  bishops,  on  the  occasion 
of  the  schism  of  Peter  Leo,  the  anti-pope,  also  against  the 
errors  of  Peter  de  Bruis,  and  Arnold  of  Brixia,  and  for  the 
restoration  of  discipline.  But  this  Peter  and  Arnold  were 
in  error  concerning  the  real  presence  of  Christ  in  the  eucha- 
rist,  and  taught  that  temples  and  crosses  were  to  be  destroy- 
ed, and  that  the  dead  were  not  helped  by  prayers. 

"The  eleventh  is  the  Third  Lateran,  A.  D.  1179,  cele- 
brated under  Alexander  III.,  by  300   bishops,  against  the 


ECCLESIASTICAL  COUNCILS.  211 

Schismatics  ordained  by  Victor  IV.,  the  anti-pope,  also, 
against  the  Waldenses,  who  taught  that  the  Supreme  Pontiff 
was  not  to  be  obeyed,  that  swearing  was  unlawful,  that  all 
•were  priests,  that  robbers  should  not  be  put  to  death,  &c. 

*'  The  twelfth  is  the  Fourth  Lateran,  celebrated  in  the 
year  1215,  under  Innodfent  III.,  against  the  Abbot  Joachim, 
Almaric  of  Bena,  and  the  Albigenses,  who  renewed  the 
errors  of  the  Manichseans.  There  were  present  412  bish- 
ops, and  upwards  of  800  abbots  and  priors,  numerous  pro- 
curators of  the  absent,  and  legates  of  a  great  many  princes, 
for  which  reason  it  is  usually  called  the  great  Lateran 
Council. 

"The  thirteenth  is  the  First  Council  of  Lyons,  of  140 
bishops,  in  the  year  1245,  assembled  under  Innocent  IV., 
against  the  emperor  Frederic,  who  ruled  tyrannically,  and 
who  also  was  deposed.  Various  measures  also  concerning 
the  reformation  of  morals  were  passed. 

"  The  fourteenth  is  the  Second  Council  of  Lyons,  A.  D. 
1274,  held  under  Gregory  X.,  for  the  recovery  of  the  holy 
land,  and  that  the  Greeks  might  be  called  back  to  the  faith 
and  communion  of  the  Roman  Church  :  peace  was  agreed 
upon  by  the  Latins  with  the  Greeks;  but  was  not  long  kept 
by  the  latter. 

"  The  fifteenth  is  the  Viennensian  in  France,  A.  D.  1311, 
under  Clement  V.,  of  about  300  bishops,  against  the  errors 
of  the  Beguardians,  and  Beguinians,  and  Fratrieuli,  who 
taught  that  man  in  this  life  may  attain  to  the  highest  perfec- 
tion, so  that  he  may  become  impeccable,  and  not  be  able  to 
advance  any  farther;  and,  that,  therefore,  he  should  then 
neither  pray  nor  fast,  nor  be  subjected  to  any  laws.  In  it, 
it  was  also  settled  that  the  rational  or  intellectual  soul,  is  in 
itself  and  essentially  the  form  of  the  human  body  :  the  order 
of  the  Templars  also  was  abolished. 

"  The  Council  of  Constance  followed  in  the  year  1414, 
in  order  to  abolish  a  schism  which  had  long  troubled  the 
church,  several  claiming  to  be  Pope;  also  against  the  errors 
of  Wicklif  and  John  Huss,  who  tauo;ht  that  all  things  hap- 
pen by  fatality,  that  the  church  consists  of  the  predestinated 
only,  that  no  one  is  Lord,  Prelate,  or  Bishop,  while  he  is  in 
mortal  sin,  &c.  It  was  dissolved  under  Martin  V.,  elected  in 
this  same  council.     The  French  reckon  this  council  among 


212  ECCLESIASTICAL  COUNCILS. 

the  oecumenical,  but  others  admit  it  only  as  to  the  last  ses- 
sions, and  as  to  those  actions  against  the  errors  of  Wicklif 
and  others,  which  the  same  Martin  V.  approved. 

"  The  sixteenth  is  the  Florentine,  commenced  at  Ferra- 
ra,  A.  D.  1438,  under  Eugenius  IV.,  but  transferred  to  Flo- 
rence on  account  of  the  plague,  and  there  dissolved,  A.  D. 
1439 ;  in  it  the  Greeks  agreed  with  the  Latins  concerning 
the  procession  of  the  Holy  Spirit  from  the  Father  and  the 
Son,  concerning  purgatory,  concerning  the  Supremacy  of 
the  Roman  Pontiff  over  the  whole  earth,  concerning  the  Eu- 
charist, that  it  may  be  prepared  equally  with  unleavened  and 
fermented  bread,  and  concerning  various  rites.  The  union 
of  the  Armenians  with  the  Roman  Church  followed  the  re- 
conciliation of  the  Greeks  with  the  Latins,  (which,  however, 
did  not  last  long ;)  who  (the  Armenians)  received  from  Eu- 
gene IV.  letters  of  union,  containing  in  a  compendium  the 
Catholic  doctrine. 

"  The  Seventeenth  is  the  Fifth  Lateran,  commenced  in 
the  year  1512,  under  Julius  II.  and  Leo  X.,  of  114  Bishops, 
against  the  Conventicle  of  Pisa,  and  for  the  reformation  of 
morals ;  in  this  it  was  settled  that  the  rational  soul 

IS  IMMORTAL. 

"  The  eighteenth  is  the  Council  of  Trent,  commenced 
Dec.  13,  A.  D.  1545,  under  Paul  III. ;  on  account  of  a  pes- 
tilence affecting  the  city  of  Trent,  it  was  transferred  to  Bo- 
nonia ;  afterwards  it  was  brought  back  to  Trent ;  on  account 
of  threatening  wars,  it  was  again  interrupted  ;  finally,  on  the 
4th  day  of  December,  A.  D.,  1563,  it  was  dissolved  under 
Pius  IV. ;  255  Fathers  subscribed.  This  council  was  cele- 
brated especially  against  the  errors  of  the  Lutherans,  Cal- 
vinists,  and  other  heretics,  at  that  time  rampant." 

Concerning  the  authority  of  Councils,     (89.) 

"  May  ecclesiastical  councils  err? 

"All  admit  that  particular  councils,  or  such  as  are  not 
general,  may  err;  yet  even  they  themselves  have  seldom 
erred,  if  their  great  number  is  considered,  and  if  reference  is 
made  to  councils  of  Catholic  Bishops. 

"  If  a  particular  council,  in  which  heresies  are  condemned, 
is  approved  by  the  Supreme  Pontiff  for  the  whole  church,  it 


ECCLESIASTICAL  COUNCILS.  213 

obtains  infallible  authority  in  the  faith,  founded  indeed  on  the 
infallibility  of  the  Pope  himself;  and  thus  the  Roman  See 
has  approved  two  African  provincial  councils,  the  Milevitian 
and  Carthaginian,  against  Pelagius  and  Celestius  ;  and  hence 
St.  Augustine,  in  discourse  131,  concerning  the  words  of  the 
apostle,  judged  that  the  matter  against  the  Pelagians  was  al- 
together concluded,  saying  '  Answers  have  come  from  Rome, 
the  question  has  been  decided,  would  that  an  end  might  some- 
time be  put  to  error  !' 

"In  our  day,  says  Benedict  XIV,  bk.  13,  concerning  the 
diocese,  synod,  ch.  3.  (vol.  3,  p.  287  and  290,  Mechlin  edit.) 
in  particular  councils,  questions  of  faith  are  not  wont  to  be 
discussed,  but  decrees  are  passed,  relating  merely  to  discip- 
line ;  yet  it  happens  sometimes,  that  these  also  are  approved 
by  the  Apostolic  See  ;  and  hence  it  might  be  doubted  whe- 
ther from  this  confirmation,  they  acquire  the  power  of  oblig- 
ing the  whole  church?  To  which  the  same  Pontiff  replies, 
that  confirmation,  indeed,  adds  strength  to  these  confirmed 
decrees,  but  that  they  by  no  means  extend  to  other  dioceses, 
unless  the  Pope  has  otherwise  expressed  :  hence  the  Provin- 
cial Synod  of  Mechlin,  in  the  year  1607,  although  confirmed 
by  Paul  V.  does  not  transcend  the  limits  of  the  province. 

"  Can  general  councils  err  ? 

"  General  councils,  without  the  confirmation  or  approba- 
tion of  the  Roman  Pontiff,  are  fallible,  and  have  frequently 
erred,  as  is  plain  in  the  Ariminensian,  Second  Ephesian,  &c. 
because  thus  they  do  not  represent  the  Church,  but  a  body 
without  head,  to  which  Christ  has  not  promised  infallibility. 

"  But  if  the  assent  and  confirmation  of  the  Pope  is  afforded 
only  to  some  decrees  of  the  council,  then  they  alone  will 
have  plenary  authority ;  as  was  done  in  the  case  of  the 
decrees  of  the  Council  of  Constance. 

"  Yet  the  promises  of  Christ,  made  to  the  Church,  appear 
on  the  whole  to  require  that  a  general  council,  held  when 
the  Pope  is  dead  or  doubtful,  may  have  passive  infallibility, 
or  guard  the  faith  and  customs,  and  not  define  anything 
contrary. 

"  That  general  councils,  approved  by  the  Supreme  Pontiff, 
cannot  err  in  defining  matters  of  faith  and  customs,  is  cer- 
tain as  a  matter  of  faith ;  and  hence  they  are  immediately 
regarded  as  manifest  heretics,  who  presume  to  call  in  ques- 
18* 


214  ECCLESIASTICAL  COUNCILS. 

tion  any  things  decreed  by  such  councils  :  hence  St.  Gregory, 
bk.  I.  epist.  24,  says  '  that  he  received  and  venerated 

THE    first    four    COUNCILS    JUST    AS     THE    BOOKS    OF    THE 
HOLY  GOSPEL.' 

"  This  infallibility  is  proved  by  No.  80,  from  which  it  is 
plain  that  the  Church  is  infallible  in  matters  of  faith  and  cus- 
toms :  but  a  general  council  represents  the  whole  Church, 
therefore,  &:c.  Hence  the  statutes  of  a  general  council  are 
said  to  be  from  the  Holy  Spirit,  according  to  Acts  xv.  28. 

*  It  HATH  SEEMED  GOOD  TO    THE   HoLY  GhOST  AND  TO  US.' 

Moreover,  if  a  general  council,  approved  by  the  Pope,  has 
not  infallible  authority,  it  would  follow  that  there  is  not  a 
certain  and  undisputed  authority  in  the  Church  for  settling 
controversies ;  which  is  against  No.  69. 

"  Ohj.  St.  Augustine,  bk.  2,  concerning  baptism  against 
the  Donatists,  chap.  5,  says  that  the  former  plenary  councils 
themselves,  are  frequently  amended  by  later  ones ;  but  that 
which  may  be  amended  is  not  infallible ;  therefore,  &c. 

"  Ans.  Several  answers  to  this  passage  may  be  given  : 

"1.  That  St.  Augustine  is  speaking  of  plenary  councils 
in  general,  as  well  of  those  not  approved,  as  of  the  approved  : 
and  thus"  it  can  happen  that  the  former,  which  had  not  been 
approved,  and  contained  errors,  may  be  amended  by  later 
approved  (councils). 

"  2.  St.  Augustine  appears  not  to  speak  concerning  gene- 
ral councils  properly,  but  improperly,  just  as  national  coun- 
cils are  called  general,  and  as  he  calls  the  Hyponeusian 
Synod  plenary. 

"  3.  If  it  be  understood  concerning  councils  truly  oecu- 
menical, it  must  be  said  that  St.  Augustine  only  means,  that 
the  former  may  be  amended  by  subsequent  ones  in  simple 
facts,  and  in  those  things  which  relate  to  discipline,  ceremo- 
nies, and  other  ecclesiastical  customs ;  and  hence  he  subjoins 
to  the  same  passage:  'As  in  the  course  of  experience  that 
which  had  been  hidden  is  opened,  and  that  which  was  con- 
cealed becomes  known ;'  but  these  things  which  belong  to 
the  faith,  are  known  not  by  experience,  but  by  the  Word  of 
God  written  or  handed  down. 

"  Yet  do  not  infer  from  this  that  it  can  happen  that  the 
church  may  introduce  or  approve  a  general  discipline  that 
may  be  hurtful  to  the  salvation  of  her  own.     In  the  apos- 


ECCLESIASTICAL  COUNCILS.  215 

tolical  decree  already  cited,  abstinence  from  blood  and  things 
strangled,  was  a  mere  point  of  discipline,  and  indeed  not  to 
be  of  long  duration ;  and  yet,  in  enjoining  it,  the  apostles 
say :  *  It  hath  seemed  good  to  the  Holy  Ghost  and  to  us :' 
by  which  words  they  sufficiently  intimate  that  the  church, 
in  sanctioning  general  discipline,  has  the  Holy  Spirit  as  pre- 
sident and  assistant.  Therefore,  although  the  reason  of 
acting  is  various,  yet  it  is  always  wisely  accommodated  to 
the  various  circumstances  of  times  and  persons. 

"  4.  Finally,  certain  subsequent  councils,  define  more 
clearly  some  things  which  were  not  yet  sufficiently  settled 
in  former  ones ;  and  thus  the  former  councils  are  elucidated 
by  subsequent  ones. 

"  It  is  here  to  be  observed  with  Estuis,  in  Bk.  2,  &c.,  ♦  Not 
all  things  which  are  said  in  any  way  whatever  in  the  decrees 
of  councils,  are  to  be  considered  as  settled  ;  but  those  things 
only  to  which  the  intention  of  the  persons  resolving  and  de- 
fining is  properly  directed.  But  this  is  known  from  the 
circumstances  of  the  case,  and  from  the  causes  or  occasions 
of  framing  the  decrees. 

"  Melchior  Canus  gives  the  following  rules,  by  which  a 
definition  of  a  council  pertaining  to  the  faith  may  be  discri- 
minated, Bk.  5.  de  locis  theol.  ch.  v.  9,  4. 

"  1.  The  first  is,  if  those  who  assert  the  contrary  are  con- 
sidered heretics. 

"  2.  When  the  Synod  prescribes  decrees  in  this  form,  *  If 
any  one  shall  think  so  and  so,  let  him  be  accursed.' 

"  3.  If  sentence  of  excommunication  is  passed  by  the  law 
itself  against  those  who  shall  contradict. 

"  4.  If  it  is  said  that  any  thing  is  to  be  firmly  believed,  ex- 
pressly and  properly,  by  the  faithful ;  or  is  to  be  received  as 
a  doctrine  of  the  Catholic  faith,  or,  in  other  similar  words, 
that  any  thing  is  contrary  to  the  gospel,  or  the  doctrine  of 
the  apostles.  But  it  must  be  said,  not  as  opinion,  but  as  a 
certain  and  firm  decree." 

I  presume  my  readers  will  excuse  me  for  not  offering  an 
elaborate  refutation  of  the  infallibility  of  the  general  coun- 
cils of  the  Romish  Church.     They  were  composed  of  frail 


216  ECCLESIASTICAL  COUNCILS. 

and  fallible  men,  as  was  but  too  often  signally  manifest  in  the 
intrigues  and  animosities  by  which  they  were  marked,  and 
in  the  preposterous  absurdities,  which  were  defined  and 
decreed  as  the  results  of  infallible  deliberations  and  disputes. 

Not  a  few  of  these  councils,  so  far  from  being  assemblies 
of  pious  and  learned  divines,  were  mere  cabals ;  the  majority 
of  which  were  quarrelsome,  fanatical,  domineering  and  dis- 
honest prelates,  who,  as  Dr.  Jortin  says,  "  wanted  to  compel 
men  to  approve  all  their  opinions  of  which  they  themselves 
had  no  clear  conceptions,  and  to  anathematize  and  oppress 
those,  who  would  not  implicitly  submit  to  their  determi- 
nations." 

The  audacious  attempt  to  make  the  statutes  of  such  coun- 
cils equivalent  in  authority  to  the  precepts  of  the  Word  of 
God,  and  the  impious  assertion  that  these  quarrelsome  cabals 
were  directed  in  their  deliberations  by  the  Spirit  of  God,  so 
that  they  might  properly  say  in  the  language  of  the  apostles, 
*'  it  hath  seemed  good  to  the  Holy  Ghost  and  to  us,"  are  no- 
thing short  of  rank  blasphemy  ! 

To  the  faithful,  it  would  no  doubt  be  consolatory  to  know 
that  in  the  sixteenth  century,  the  immortality  of  the  rational 
soul  was  definitely  settled^  by  the  Fifth  Lateran  Council, 
were  it  not,  that  they,  alas !  expect  their  immortality  to  be 
verified  and  almost  eked  out  in  purgatory. 

For  a  succinct  vindication  of  the  doctrines  and  practice  of 
the  Waldenses,  and  a  narrative  of  their  persecutions  and 
sufi*erings,  I  refer  my  readers  to  a  little  work  by  Dr.  Brown- 
lie,  recently  published  at  the  office  of  the  Protestant  Refor- 
mation Society  of  New  York. 


CONCERNING  THE  SUPREME  PONTIFF.       217 

CHAPTER  XXIII. 
Concerning  the  Supreme  Pontiff.   (90.)  4 

"  What  is  the  Supreme  Pontiff? 

"  He  is  Christ's  Vicar  upon  earth,  and  the  visible  head  of 
his  church. 

"  Christ  instituted  the  church  of  the  New  Testament  upon 
earth,  not  on  the  plan  of  an  aristocratic  or  democratic  go- 
vernment, but  on  the  plan  of  a  monarchical  government,  yet 
tempered  by  that  which  is  best  in  an  aristocracy,  as  was  said 
No.  81. 

"  But  when  Christ  was  about  to  withdraw  his  visible  pre- 
sence by  his  ascension  into  heaven,  he  constituted  his  Vicar 
the  visible  head  of  the  church,  he  himself  remaining  the 
supreme,  essential  and  visible  head. 

"  Who  is  called  Supreme  Pontiff,  and  wherefore  ? 

"  The  Roman  Pontiff,  not  only  because  he  holds  the  high- 
est honour  and  dignity  in  the  church,  but  principally,  because 
he  has  supreme  and  universal  authority,  power  and  jurisdic- 
tion over  all  bishops  and  the  whole  church. 

"  He  is  also  called  the  pope,  which  word  signifies  either 
father,  or  by  antonomasia  the  father  of  fathers ;  also  the 
Chief  Priest  of  the  Apostolic  See ;  so  that  the  Roman  See 
by  way  of  eminence  is  called  without  any  addition  the  Apos- 
tolic See." 

Concerning  the  Supremacy  of  Peter.   (91.) 

"As  heretics  can  not  only  deny  the  superiority  of  present 
popes,  but  also  the  supremacy  of  the  apostle  Peter  himself, 
therefore  this  must  be  asserted  against  them. 

"  I.  But  it  is  proved  that  Peter  received  supremacy  from 
Christ  above  the  other  apostles,  from  Matt.  xvi.  18.,  where 
the  supremacy  is  promised,  and  John,  ch.  xxi.,  where  it  is 
conferred. 

"Christ  says.  Matt.  xvi.  18:  *  thou  art  Peter,  and  upon 
this  rock  I  will  build  my  church,  v.  19.,  and  I  will  give  to 
thee  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven ;  and  whatsoever 


218       CONCERNING  THE  SUPREME  PONTIFF. 

thou  shalt  bind  upon  earth,'  &c.  Here  although  the  name 
of  supremacy  is  not  expressed  ;  yet  it  is  manifestly  promised 
under  two  metaphors :  the  former  metaphor  is  taken  from 
the  plan  of  a  foundation  and  a  building :  but  what  the  foun- 
dation is  in  a  building,  this  the  superior  is  in  a  community, 
the  king  in  a  kingdom,  &c. :  the  other  is  borrowed  from  the 
delivery  of  keys :  for  he  to  whom  the  keys  of  a  city  are 
delivered  is  constituted  or  declared  king  or  governor  of  the 
city.  Add  to  this,  the  interpretation  and  authority  of  the 
Holy  Fathers,  as  may  be  seen  in  Bellarmine,  Sylvius, 
Tournely,  &c. 

"  Calvin  objects  :  that  by  the  word,  rock,  upon  which  it  is 
said  the  church  shall  be  built,  is  to  be  understood  not  Peter 
but  Christ,  and  therefore  the  Evangelist  changes  the  term, 
and  afterwards  said,  *  Thou  art  Peter,'  by  saying  '  not  upon 
this  Peter,''  but  '  upon  this  roch.'' 

"  Ans.  I  deny  the  antecedent :  how  foolish  this  observa- 
tion of  Calvin  is,  is  plain  from  the  Syriac,  which  idiom 
Christ  used,  in  which  the  difference  of  gender  is  not  found, 
which  is  in  the  Latin  and  Greek :  and  hence  Christ  said 
with  one  and  the  same  word  :  *  Thou  art  Cephas,  and  upon 
this  Cephas,'  which  in  Latin  should  be  rendered,  <  thou  art 
a  rock,  and  upon  this  rock ;'  but  the  Latin  translator  ren- 
ders, '  Thou  art  Peter,'  in  the  masculine,  because  the  remark 
was  made  concerning  a  man,  having  followed  the  rule  of  the 
Greeks,  among  whom  the  word  Petra  received  a  masculine 
and  feminine  termination,  {rrk^og,  m.  and  crsV^a,  f.,)  which 
the  Latin  word,  Petra,  does  not  receive ;  therefore  when 
Christ  says,  upon  this  rock,  the  pronoun  this  manifestly  re- 
fers to  the  rock,  concerning  which  mention  was  just  made ; 
but  immediately  before,  Christ  had  called  not  himself  but 
Peter  the  rock  ;  therefore,  &c. 

*'  Hence  the  mystery  of  the  change  of  the  name  Simon  into 
Peter,  or  a  rock,  John  i.  42.  Besides,  if  these  words,  *  upon 
this  rock,'  should  be  referred  to  Christ  and  not  to  Peter, 
Christ  would  in  vain  have  said  to  Peter ;  '  I  tell  thee  because 
thou  art  Peter ;'  nor  ought  he  to  have  said,  I  will  build,  but 
I  have  built,  or  I  build.  - 

"You  will  urge,  St.  Aug.  in  the  last  treatise  upon  John, 
by  this  rock  understands  Christ.  It  is  confirmed  by  his  opin- 
ion, Bk.  I.  Retract,  chap,  xxi.,  where  he  says ;  *  For  it  was 


CONCERNING  THE  SUPREME  PONTIFF.       219 

not  said  to  him,  thou  art  a  rock,  ^ut  thou  art  Peter ;  but 
Christ  was  the  rock.' 

"  Ans.  St.  Augustine  formerly  proposed  this  interpreta- 
tion, pleading  against  the  Donatists,  who  deduced  the  power 
and  efficacy  of  the  Sacraments  from  the  holiness  of  the  min- 
ister, and  hence  he  preferred  placing  this  foundation  in  Christ 
rather  than  in  Peter,  lest  the  Donatists  might  thence  have 
deduced  a  confirmation  of  their  error.  Yet  he  admitted  our 
interpretation,  which  is  the  common  one ;  indeed  in  the  pas- 
sage adduced,  mentioning  both  he  subjoins :  '  Of  these  two 
opinions,  let  the  reader  choose  that  which  is  the  more  pro- 
bable.' 

"  This  doubt  of  St.  Aug.  arose  from  ignorance  of  the  He- 
brew or  Syriac  and  of  the  Greek  ;  to  those  skilled  in  which, 
it  is  known  that  the  phrase  *  Thou  art  Cephas,'  is  the  same 
as  *Thou  art  a  rock.' 

"  You  may  rejoin :  Christ  alone  is  the  foundation  of  the 
Church,  according  to  that  1  Cor.  iii.  11.  '  For  no  one  can  lay 
another  foundation  but  that  which  is  laid,  which  is  Christ 
Jesus  ;'  therefore,  by  this  rock  Peter  is  not  meant,  but  Christ. 

*'  Ans.  I  deny  the  antecedent :  Christ  alone  is  indeed 
the  essential  and  primary  foundation  which  consists  in  itself 
and  depends  on  no  other,  but  sustaining  all  those  things 
which  belong  to  the  building  of  the  church,  and,  therefore, 
Peter  himself:  yet  it  is  consistent  with  this  that  Peter  is  the 
secondary  foundation,  founded  on  Christ  by  the  virtue  and 
authority  received  from  himself 

"  The  Lutherans  object :  by  the  rock  upon  which  the 
Church  is  said  to  be  built,  Peter  is  not  meant,  but  the  faith 
or  confession  of  Peter.  They  confirm  it  from  St.  Chrysos- 
tom,  St.  Ambrose,  St.  Hilary,  &c. 

"  Ans.  I  deny  the  antecedent :  for  it  is  plain  from  what 
has  been  said,  that  the  person  of  Peter  ought  to  be  under- 
stood, which  the  following  words,  '  I  will  give  to  thee  the 
keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven,'  evidently  show. 

*'  To  the  confirmation  from  the  Holy  Fathers,  it  must  be 
said,  that  they  sometimes  speak  thus  in  a  causal  sense ;  be- 
cause, indeed,  Peter  confessing  the  divinity  of  Christ,  ob- 
tained for  the  sake  of  the  merit  of  his  faith,  that  he  should 
be  the  foundation  of  the  Church. 

"Besides,  those  saints  do  not  mean  that  the  Church  is 


220        CONCERNING  THE  SUPREME  PONTIFF. 

founded  upon  the  faith  in  itself  considered,  without  relation 
to  the  person  of  Peter,  but  upon  his  personal  faith,  which  is 
the  same  as  upon  the  person  itself  of  Peter  having  faith  : 
and  hence,  when  they  say,  that  the  Church  is  founded  upon 
the  faith  of  Peter,  or  that  Peter's  faith,  or  confession  of  failh^ 
is  the  foundation  of  the  Church,  they  nnean  it  in  this  sense, 
that  Peter  by  reason  of  his  own  indefectible  faith,  indefectibly 
sustains  and  confirms  all  in  it. 

"  Against  the  argument  deduced  from  the  delivery  of  the 
keys,  the  heretics  object :  the  keys  are  promised  immediately 
to  the  Church,  and  not  to  the  person  of  Peter. 

"  The  antecedent  is  proved  from  St.  Augustine,  treatise  50 
upon  John,  where  he  says  thus,  '  Peter,  when  he  received 
the  keys,  signified  Holy  Church ;'  therefore,  &c. 

"  Ans.  I  deny  the  antecedent :  for  it  is  evident  that  from 
what  was  before  said,  it  is  clear  that  the  remark  was  directed 
to  the  person  of  Peter. 

"  As  for  St.  Augustine  and  the  other  fathers,  it  must  be 
said  that  they  only  mean  that  Peter  did  not  receive  the  keys 
as  a  private  person,  but  on  the  condition  of  the  Supreme 
Pastor,  and  for  the  advantage  of  the  Church,  from  whom, 
by  ordinary  right,  the  power  of  the  keys  was  to  be  conferred 
upon  the  other  superiors  of  the  Church,  the  bishops  and 
pastors. 

"  Add  to  this,  that  the  fathers  do  not  always  quote  Sacred 
Scripture  in  the  literal  sense,  but  often  in  the  mystic  sense, 
and  sometimes  in  the  accommodatory  sense. 

*'  Ohj.  The  same  which  is  promised  to  Peter,  Matt.  xvi. 
19.  *  I  will  give  thee  the  keys,'  &c.  is  promised  to  the  other 
apostles.  Matt,  xviii.  18.  *  Whatever  ye  shall  bind  upon 
earth,'  &c. 

"  Ans.  I  deny  the  antecedent :  for  the  power  of  the  keys 
promised  to  Peter  alone.  Matt,  xvi.,  and  given,  John  xxi.,  is 
something  greater  and  better  than  the  power  of  binding  and 
loosing,  which  is  only  an  inadequate  act  of  the  keys. 

"  Observe,  although  the  other  apostles  received  the  power 
of  preaching  everywhere,  and  founding  churches,  and  thus 
a  certain  universal  jurisdiction  through  universality  of  place, 
that  this,  although  such,  was  still  only  extraordinary,  and 
with  subjection  to  Peter,  and  to  become  extinct  with  them- 
selves ;  hence  the  proposition  which  placed  St.  Peter  and  St. 


CONCERNING  THE  SUPREME  PONTIFF.       221 

Paul  as  the  two-fojd  head  of  the  church,  was  justly  con- 
demned as  heretical  by  Innocent  X. 

"  Prove  that  the  primacy  of  Peter  is  gathered  through 
those  words,  John  xxi.  17,  '  Feed  my  sheep  !' 

"  II.  Because,  by  these  words,  under  a  metaphor  deduced 
from  the  pastor  of  sheep,  the  office  of  pastor  and  ruler 
of  the  universal  church  is  enjoined  upon  Peter,  &c.,  there- 
fore the  power  is  conceded  to  the  whole  church.  It  is 
proved :  because  to  feed  signifies  not  only  to  teach,  but  also 
to  have  authority  and  to  rule :  just  as  it  belongs  to  a  pastor 
of  sheep,  not  only  to  afford  food,  but  also  to  conduct  and 
bring  back,  to  defend  and  restrain. 

"  By  '  my  lambs — my  sheep,'  is  signified  the  universality 
of  Christ's  faithful,  for  the  pronoun  my  is  equivalent  to  a 
universal  sign,  as  Christ  speaks  indefinitely  and  all  the 
faithful  are  Christ's  sheep  or  lambs. 

"The  heretics  object:  it  was  not  said   to   Peter  alone: 

*  Feed  my  sheep,'  therefore,  &c. 

"They  prove  the  antecedent  from  St.  Augustine,  Book 
concerning  the  Christian  Combat,  chap,  xxx,  where  he  says, 
*When  it  is  said  to  him  (to  Peter),  it  is  said  to  all :  Lovest 
thou  me?   Feed  my  sheep.' 

"  I  deny  the  antecedent :  because  circumstances  show 
that  those  words  were  spoken  to  Peter  alone :  for  Christ  ad- 
dresses  Peter  alone,  accosting   him   by  his   proper  name, 

*  Simon,  son  of  Jonas ;'  so  that  indeed  others  are  excluded  by 
these  words :  '  Lovest  thou  me  more  than  these  V 

"  As  for  St.  Augustine  we  reply,  that  it  may  be  said  to  all 
other  superiors  of  the  church,  '  Feed  my  sheep,'  in  so  far, 
namely,  as  the  part  of  the  flock  which  was  committed  to 
them  is  concerned ;  or  according  to  the  accommodatory 
sense,  inasmuch  as  they  ought  to  imitate  the  model  of  Peter 
in  feeding  and  governing. 

"  III.  The  third  argument  in  order  to  prove  Peter's  su- 
premacy from  Sacred  Scripture  can  be  borrowed  from 
various  prerogatives,  with  which  Peter  was  endowed  before 
the  other  apostles. 

"  The  first  prerogative  is  the  change  of  name :  *  Thou 
shalt  be  called  Cephas.'   John  i.  42. 

"  The  second  is,  that  in  the  order  of  the  enumeration  of 
the  apostles,  Peter  is  always  named  in  the  first  place  by  the 
19 


222       CONCERNING  THE  SUPREME  PONTIFF. 

Evangelists,  notwithstanding  the  change  of  the  order  of  the 
others.  Thus  it  is  expressly  said,  Matt.  x.  2.,  '  The  first 
Simon,  who  is  called  Peter.' 

"  The  third,  tribute  is  paid  for  Christ  and  Peter.  Matt, 
xvii.  26. 

*'  The  fourth,  Peter  alone  walks  with  Christ  upon  the  wa- 
ter.    Matt.  xiv.  29. 

"  The  fifth,  Christ  says  specially  to  Peter.  Luke  ch.  xxii. 
32.  *  I  have  prayed  for  thee  that  thy  faith  fail  not ;  and  thou 
being  once  converted,  confirm  thy  brethren.' 

"The sixth,  P-eter,  Acts  i.  15,  proposes  and  teaches  that 
a  new  apostle  must  be  chosen  in  the  place  of  Judas ;  Acts  ii. 
14,  afler  the  Holy  Spirit  had  been  received,  he  first  promul- 
gates the  gospel ;  Acts  iii.  6,  -he  does  the  first  miracle  in 
proof  of  the  faith ;  Acts  x.  28,  he  first  begins  to  preach  to 
the  Gentiles ;  Acts  xii.  5,  for  Peter  prayer  was  made  with- 
out intermission  by  the  church ;  Acts  xv.  7,  he  speaks  first 
'  as  though  president  of  the  council  at  Jerusalem,  and  all  fol- 
low his  opinion.  These  and  other  prerogatives,  with  the  in- 
terpretations of  the  Holy  Fathers,  Bellarmine  rightly  deduces, 
Bk.  I.,  concerning  the  Roman  Pontiff. 

"  Against  these,  the  heretics  again  object,  I.  Paul  say- 
ing. Gal.  ii.  7  :  '  To  me  was  committed  the  gospel  of  the  un- 
circumcision,  as  to  Peter  was  that  of  the  circumcision,'  sig- 
nifies that  he  is  the  apostle  of  the  Gentiles,  as  Peter  of  the 
Jews ;  therefore  jurisdiction  was  divided  between  them. 

"  Arts.  I  deny  the  inference :  for  that  was  a  division,  not 
of  jurisdiction,  but  of  nations,  in  order  to  the  work  of  preach- 
ing; viz.,  that  as  Peter  had  been  principally  destined  for 
preaching  to  the  Jews,  so  Paul  had  been  specially  destined 
by  Christ  for  preaching  to  the  Gentiles. 

"They  object  II.  Paul  in  the  same  place,  v.  11,  resists 
Peter  to  his  face,  therefore  he  was  not  subject  to  him. 

"  Ans.  I  deny  the  inference :  because  Paul  does  not  blame 
Peter  by  authority  as  a  superior,  an  inferior,  but  by  fraternal 
reproof,  which  is  sometimes  lawful  for  an  inferior  with  re- 
spect to  a  superior.  Some  maintain  that  Cephas,  concern- 
ing whom  Paul  there  speaks,  was  not  Peter,  hut  another 
disciple.  Kerkherdere  may  be  consulted  concerning  the 
reproved  Cephas. 

"  They  object  III.  If  Peter  was  the  head  of  the  church, 


CONCERNING  THE  SUPREME  PONTIFF.       223 

the  church  must  perish  at  the  deatli  of  Peter ;  for  the  head 
dying,  the  body  dies. 

"  Ans.  I  deny  the  inference :  for  that  the  body  separated 
from  the  head  must  die,  is  true  of  that  head  from  which  the 
members  derive  sense  and  motion :  but  Peter  was  not  thus 
the  head  of  the  church,  but  Christ :  but  it  is  not  true  con- 
cerning the  head  of  which  the  loss  is  merely  external  ac- 
cording to  external  government ;  such  was  Peter,  and  such 
are  his  successors ;  for  when  the  Pope  dies,  Christ  the  in- 
visible head  remains,  from  whom  the  church  derives  life  and 
sense,  and  is  prepared  to  receive  another  visible  head." 

If  the  doctrine  of  Peter^s  supremacy  were  taught  in  the 
word  of  God,  it  would  still  be  incumbent  upon  Papists  to 
show  by  incontestible  evidence,  that  Peter  was  bishop  of 
Rome,  and  that  he  had  divine  authority  to  invest  all  his  suc- 
cessors in  that  See  with  pre-eminence  over  all  their  brethren. 
If  the  proof  fails  in  any  one  of  these  three  points,  the  rock 
upon  which  popery  is  built  is  broken,  and  the  whole  fabric 
falls  into  ruins.  Against  the  foregoing  arguments,  we  offer 
the  following  as  our  reasons  for  disbelieving  the  first  propo- 
sition, viz.,  that  Peter  was  invested  with  supremacy. 

1.  If  such  authority  was  really  conferred  upon  Peter,  the 
Evangelists  who  by  the  inspiration  of  the  Holy  Spirit  re- 
corded all  things  necessary  for  faith  and  salvation  would 
have  mentioned  it  in  plain  and  unequivocal  language.  But 
do  they  ever  say  that  one  of  the  apostles  was  to  have  and 
to  claim  authority  over  all  the  rest?  If  so,  when  and  where? 
Dcr  they  not  on  the  contrary  explicitly  affirm  that  equal  au- 
thority was  given  to  all  the  apostles?  John  xx.  23.  When 
the  question  who  should  be  greatest  was  started  among  them, 
there  is  no  mention  made  of  any  preference  given  by  Christ 
to  Peter;  but  the  Saviour  evidently  condemns  the  lust  of 
power,  and  says,  "  ye  know  that  they  which  are  accounted 
to  rule  over  the  gentiles  exercise  lordship  over  them ;  and 
their  great  ones  exercise  authority  upon  them.  But  so 
8hall.it  not  be  among  you  ;  but  whosoever  will  be  grea* 


224        CONCERNING  THE  SUPREME  PONTIFF. 

among  you  shall  be  your  minister,  (or  servant.)  Mark  x. 
42,  43.  On  another  occasion  he  said  to  his  disciples,  "  Be 
not  ye  called  Rabbi,  for  one  is  your  Master,  even  Christ, 
and  all  ye  are  brethren."  (Matt.  xxii.  8,  9.)  Could  there 
have  been  a  plainer  intimation  of  the  equality  of  the 
apostles  ? 

2.  When  the  Apostle  Paul  enumerates  the  various  orders 
in  the  churches,  he  says,  "  God  hath  set  some  in  the  church, 
firsts  APOSTLES ;  secondly,  prophets ;  thirdly,  teachers  ;  after 
that  miracles,  then  gifts  of  healings,  helps,  governments,  di- 
versities of  tongues."  (1  Cor.  xii.  28.)  Strange  omission  ! 
Not  one  word  of  Christ's  Vicar !  First  apostles,  not  first, 
Peter  ! 

3.  If  Peter  had  really  possessed  the  supremacy  ascribed 
to  him,  how  could  Paul  have  said,  (2  Cor.  xi.  5.)  "I  was 
not  a  whit  behind  the  very  chiefest  apostles  ?"  What  ?  Not 
a  whit  behind  Peter  1 

4.  It  is  natural  to  suppose  that  if  Peter  had  been  the  ac- 
knowledged chief  of  the  apostles,  he  would  have  been  called 
upon  to  decide  controversies,  but  this  was  never  the  case. 
In  the  debate  between  Paul  and  Barnabas  and  others,  about 
circumcision,  they  referred  the  point,  not  to  Peter,  but  to  the 
Church,  and  the  apostles  and  elders  at  Jerusalem.  The 
conclusion  to  which  they  arrived  was  recorded,  not  as  the 
decree  of  Peter,  (for  he  did  not  even  preside,)  but  as  that 
which  "  seemed  good  to  the  Holy  Ghost  and  to  us,"  i.  e.  to 
the  apostles,  elders,  and  brethren,  who  met  at  Jerusalem  ion 
that  occasion,  (Acts  xv.  2 — 29.) 

5.  Paul  would  not  have  had  occasion  to  withstand  Peter 
to  his  face,  had  his  erring  brother  been  infallible ;  and  if  he 
had  possessed  the  supremacy  ascribed  to  him  by  the  Church 
of  Rome,  it  would  scarcely  have  been  decorous  in  Paul  to 
expose  the  failing  of  his  superior.  Neither  can  this  be  re- 
garded as  an  ordinary  fraternal  reproof,  (as  Peter  Dens  inti- 
mates,) because  that  is  to  be  administered  privately,  as  a  re- 


CONCERNING  THE  SUPREME  PONTIFF.        225 

ference  to  Matt,  xviii.  will  show.  Nor  will  Kerkherdere,  to 
whom  we  are  referred,  extricate  Romanists  from  this  diffi- 
culty, by  suggesting  that  the  "  Cephas,  concerning  whom 
Paul  there  speaks,  was  not  Peter,  but  another  disciple."  The 
connexion  shows  it  could  be  no  other  than  the  infallible 
apostle  himself.  Besides,  if  it  had  been  another  disciple,  it 
would  have  been  an  unpardonable  omission  in  the  sacred 
writer,  had  he  neglected  to  state  the  fact  in  emphatic  language. 
There  were  two  of  our  Lord's  twelve  disciples,  who  were 
called  Judas,  but  the  evangelists  are  careful  in  distinguishing 
between  them.  Hence  we  read  of  "  Judas  Iscariot,"  and 
Judas  ("  not  Iscariot,")  and  if  anything  disparaging  was  to 
be  mentioned,  which  affected  another  disciple  of  the  same 
name  as  Peter,  and  not  the  apostle  himself,  in  common  jus- 
tice it  would  have  been  stated. 

6.  Again  ;  we  find  the  apostles  sending  Peter  as  their 
messenger,  in  company  with  John,  (Acts  viii.  14  ;)  if  he  had 
been  Pope  among  the  apostles,  he  would  have  sent  them. 
Would  not  his  Holiness  marvel  greatly  if  his  Bishops  should 
send  him  on  a  missionary  tour  with  one  of  their  own  num- 
ber? 

7.  If  Peter  had  possessed  the  supremacy  ascribed  to  him, 
is  it  probable  that  he  would  have  been  accosted  by  his  bre- 
thren as  we  read  in  Acts  xi.  1 — 4?  Would  he  have  defer- 
red to  the  judgment  of  private  brethren  so  far  as  to  vindi- 
cate himself  before  them  1  The  brethren  did  not  bow  down 
reverently  and  kiss  the  apostle's  sandal,  and  address  him 
with  the  blasphemous  title  which  Romish  writers  have  con- 
ferred upon  theic  PontitT — "  Dominus  Deus  noster,  Papa" — 
"  Our  Lord  God,  the  Pope !" 

8.  In  short,  if  Peter  had  been  appointed  by  Christ  as  his 
vicar  upon  earth  ;  had  he  been  clothed  with  supreme  author- 
ity, he  would  certainly  have  been  called  upon  to  exercise  it, 
and  his  decisions  ex  cathedra  would  as  certainly  have  been 
recorded.     But  he  never  claimed  this  authority,  either  whpn 

19* 


220        CONCERNING  THE  SUPREME  PONTIFF. 

present  with  the  churches  or  in  his  epistles ;  he  claims  no 
more  than  an  equality  with  his  brethren,  the  apostles,  and 
pastors  of  the  church ;  "  The  elders  who  are  among  you  I 
exhort,  whom  am  also  an  elder."  The  language  of  Paul  is 
far  more  authoritative  than  Ihat  of  Peter,  1  Cor.  vii.  10  ;  1 
Tim.  V.  14.  21.  Peter,  at  the  close  of  his  first  epistle,  (v. 
1 — 3.)  warns  those  in  authority  against  being  "  lords  over 
God's  heritage," — as  though  he  had  been  divinely  directed 
himself  to  confound  the  claims  of  Anti-Christ. 

But  there  are  a  number  of  special  prerogatives  ascribed 
to  Peter  by  the  evangelists. 

The  first  is  the  change  of  name,  "  Thou  shalt  be  called 
Cephas ;"  John  i.  42.  We  must  admit  this  prerogative^ 
and  we  do  it  cheerfully — but  what  then  1  Therefore  Peter  is 
Christ's  Vicar  upon  earth !  ,  '; 

The  second  is,  "  Peter  is  always  named  first,  where  the 
apostles  are  spoken  of."  He  is  not  always  named  first,  Gal. 
ii.  9,  "  When  James,  Cephas,  and  John,  &c."  Supposing  he 
is  generally  named  first,  he  was  probably  the  oldest :  what 
does  this  prove  1     Peter's  supremacy  ! 

The  third  is,  "  Tribute  is  paid  for  Christ  and  Peter."  Ad- 
mitted. Does  that  prove  that  Peter's  successors  are  above 
all  the  kings  of  the  earth,  and  should  pay  no  tribute? 

The  fourth  is,  "  Peter  alone  walks  with  Christ  upon  the 
water."  True — and  "  when  he  saw  the  wind  boisterous,  he 
was  afraid,  and,  beginning  to  sink,  he  cried,  saying,  Lord, 
save  me."    Therefore  Peter  was  the  first  Pope ! 

The  fifl;h  is,  Christ  says  specially  to  Peter,  "  I  have 
prayed  for  thee  that  thy  faith  fail  not,"  &c.  But  did  not 
Christ  pray  thus  specially  for  Peter  because  he  knew  that 
his  disciple  was  about  to  deny  him  under  aggravating  cir- 
cumstances ?  And  if  so,  is  not  this  a  singular  proof  text  of 
Peter's  infallibility? 

The  sixth,  "  Peter  proposes  the  election  of  an  apostle  in 
the  place  of  the  traitor  Judas."     He  does.     This  establishes 


CONCERNING  THE  SUPREME  PONTIFF.       227 

his  supremacy ! !  After  the  Holy  Spirit  had  been  received, 
he  first  proclaims  the  gospel,  does  the  first  miracle,  first  be- 
gins to  preach  to  the  Gentiles !  And  for  Peter  prayer  was 
made  without  intermission  by  the  church  :  and  why  1  Be- 
cause Peter  was  in  prison.  If  any  other  apostle  had  been 
there,  they  would  have  wrestled  with  the  Lord  in  his  behalf 
just  as  they  prayed  for  Peter's  deliverance.  This  beloved 
apostle  was  naturally  ardent  and  impetuous  ;  Christ  had  loved 
him  much  and  forgiven  him  much,  and  this  was  enough  to 
make  him  bolder  than  his  brethren,  who  had  never  denied 
the  Lord  as  he  had  done.  But  now,  if  these  reasons  consti- 
tute an  argument  for  Peter^s  supremacy,  we  may  adduce 
others  which  will  make  John  a  rival  candidate. 

1.  John  was  the  only  disciple  who  leaned  on  Jesus'  breast 
at  the  last  supper. 

2.  John  is  called  the  disciple  whom  Jesus  loved. 

3.  "  Peter  beckoned  to  him  that  he  should  ask  who  it 
should  be"  that  should  betray  the  Lord. 

4.  John  alone,  of  all  the  apostles,  is  said  to  have  died  a 
natural  death,  and  he  survived  all  his  apostolic  brethren. 
Thus,  too,  we  might  prove  the  supremacy  of  Paul  and  James 
by  facts  peculiar  to  their  history :  but  we  have  neither  time 
nor  space  to  imitate  the  trifling  of  Romish  Theologians. 

The  text  upon  which  Papists  place  their  main  dependence 
is  that  which  is  so  elaborately  discussed  in  the  preceding  sec- 
tions :  "  Thou  art  Peter,  and  upon  this  rock  I  will  build  my 
church."  They  appear  to  lay  almost  as  much  stress  upon 
these  words  as  upon  the  declaration  of  Christ  at  the  institu- 
tion of  the  Lord's  Supper — "  This  is  my  body."  If  the  words, 
*'  Thou  art  Peter,"  &c.,  are  to  be  understood  at  all  figu- 
ratively, they  tell  us  that  the  metaphor  of  which  Christ  makes 
use  is  realized  in  the  person  of  Peter.  He,  personally,  is  the 
rock.  We  may,  therefore,  adopting  the  very  principles  of 
interpretation  by  which  they  seek  to  vindicate  the  strange 
doctrine  of  transubstantiation,  require  them  to  prove  that  Pe 


228        CONCERNING  THE  SUPREME  PONTIFF. 

ter  was  literally  and  truly  a  bona  fide  rock,  and  that  the 
Church  of  Christ  was  built  upon  the  body  and  blood,  bones 
and  sinews  of  the  good  apostle.  "  Thou  art  a  rock,  and 
upon  this  rock  I  will  build  my  church ;"  most  unquestiona- 
bly, this  interpretation  will  find  readier  belief  than  that  Christ 
gave  his  own  body  and  blood,  soul  and  divinity  to  the  faith- 
ful to  be  eaten  to  the  end  of  time.  The  explanation  to  which 
Peter  Dens  alludes,  and  which  he  professes  to  refute,  is  briefly 
this.  In  the  preceding  verses,  Christ  asks  his  disciples, 
"  Whom  say  ye  that  I  am  ?"  Peter  replies,  "  Thou  art  Christ, 
the  Son  of  the  living  God."  This  good  confession  Christ 
calls  the  rock  upon  which  his  Church  should  be  built,  allud- 
ing at  the  same  time  to  the  signification  of  Peter's  name. 
He  could  not  have  intended  that  Peter  should  be  literally  and 
truly  the  foundation  of  his  Church,  because  we  are  expressly 
told,  "  Other  foundation  can  no  man  lay  than  that  is  laid, 
which  is  Christ  Jesus."  If  Christ  is  the  foundation  of  his 
Church,  and  Peter  is  the  foundation  also,  then  there  are  two 
foundations  to  the  same  building ;  but  this  cannot  be.  As 
to  the  distinction  which  Peter  Dens  makes  in  noticing  this 
objection,  between  the  primary  and  secondary  foundation, 
when  we  find  it  in  the  Scriptures  we  will  cheerfully  endorse 
it.  It  is  remarkable  that  not  a  single  passage  is  adduced 
from  any  one  of  the  primitive  fathers  to  sustain  the  Romish 
interpretation  of  the  passage  in  question;  Augustine  declares 
in  so  many  words,  when  commenting  on  this  text,  "  For  it 
was  not  said  to  him,  thou  art  a  rock,  but  thou  art  Peter :  but 
the  rock  was  Christ.'''' 

The  apology  which  is  offered  for  Augustine  is  creditable 
neither  to  the  Saint  nor  to  the  person  who  ofi^ers  it.  Accord- 
ing to  Peter  Dens,  Augustine  equivocated  somewhat,  in  or- 
der to  prevent  the  Donatists  from  retorting  unpleasantly ! 
The  testimony  of  the  fathers,  however,  must  always  be  con- 
sidered of  secondary  importance ;  the  best  means  of  ascer- 


CONCERNING  THE  SUPREME  PONTIFF.       229 

taining  the  sense  of  Scripture  is  to  collate  one  passage  with 
another,  after  examining  the  scope  of  the  writer. 

But,  "  the  keys  were  given  to  Peter."  So  they  were,  and 
Peter  used  them  by  opening  the  door  of  the  gospel  on  the 
great  day  of  Pentecost,  when  the  first  fruits  of  the  Spirit 
were  manifested  in  the  conversion  of  three  thousand  souls. 
When  the  pope  becomes  a  preacher  of  the  gospel  of  Christ, 
and  employs  himself  in  laying  the  foundations  of  churches 
by  his  personal  ministry,  we  will  acknowledge  his  claim  to 
be  Peter's  successor  as  more  valid  than  it  is  at  present. 
II.  The  second  point,  which  Papists  must  prove,  is  that 
Peter  was  bishop  of  Rome, 

1.  If  Peter  really  held  this  ©ffice  by  the  tenure  and  for 
the  purpose,  for  which  the  church  of  Rome  contends,  then 
it  certainly  ought  to  be  considered  as  an  article  of  faith,  and 
as  such  it  would  have  been  distinctly  taught  and  enjoined  in 
the  word  of  God.  But  the  Scriptures  are  entirely  silent  on 
this  subject. 

2.  The  utmost  that  can  be  said  in  favour  of  Peter's  hav- 
ing resided  at  Rome,  is  that  it  is  probable,  and  even  this  can 
scarcely  be  admitted  as  proved.  But  in  a  case  of  this  kind 
the  utmost  certainty  is  requisite.  Peter  dates  his  Epistle 
from  Babylon.  Some  suppose  that  this  was  the  Babylon  in 
Assyria  ;  others  understand  it  as  a  figurative  name  of  Rome  ; 
and  whatever  reason  there  may  be  for  supposing  the  latter 
interpretation  to  be  correct,  we  may  rest  assured  that  Romish 
writers  would,  of  all  persons,  be  farthest  from  pleading  that 
Babylon  is  used  figuratively  for  Rome,  were  it  not  that  they 
are  sorely  pressed  for  evidence  to  sustain  a  darling  hy- 
pothesis ;  for  by  this  admission,  the  Babylon  of  the  Apoca- 
lypse must  likewise  be  understood  as  designating  Rome. 
Luke,  who  wrote  the  travels  of  the  apostles  Paul  and  Peter, 
takes  no  notice  of  Peter's  going  there.  And  when  the  for- 
mer apostle  writes  to  the  Romans,  and  sends  greeting  to 
about  forty  by  name,  he  says  nothing  of  Peter,  whom  he 


230       CONCERNING  THE  SUPREME  PONTIFF. 

would  scarcely  have  forgotten,  if  he  had  been  the  Pope's 
prototype ;  so  too  when  Paul  writes  from  Rome,  he  says  not 
a  word  of  Peter.  Pie  even  complains  when  writing  from 
that  city  to  the  Philippians,  (ii.  20.,)  that  *'  all  sought  their 
own,  not  the  things  which  are  Jesus  Christ's ;"  and  when 
addressing  the  Colossians,  (iv.  11.),  he  names  a  few,  who 
"  were  his  only  fellow  helpers  there."  Writing  to  Timothy 
from  the  same  city,  2  Tim.  iv.  16.,  he  declares  that  "  at  his 
first  answer  all  men  forsook  him."  Now  Peter  would  surely 
have  proved  himself  a  true  yoke-fellow,  had  he  then  been 
bishop  of  Rome.  Indeed,  the  very  nature  of  Peter's  apos- 
tolic office  constrained  him  to  go  from  place  to  place,  to 
preach  the  gospel,  and  it  will  hardly  be  asserted  even  by 
Papists  that  the  pretended  chief  of  the  apostles  would  act 
contrary  to  his  commission,  and  take  upon  him  the  charge 
of  a  church  in  any  particular  city,  which  would  necessarily 
require  such  a  residence  there  as  was  inconsistent  with  his 
duties  as  an  apostle.  Besides,  how  could  he,  who  was  the 
apostle  of  the  Jews,  take  upon  him  the  charge  of  a  Gentile 
Church  ?  And  supposing  that  he  was  bishop  of  a  church 
of  Jewish  converts,  Peter  must  have  been  strangely  negli- 
gent of  his  charge  to  have  been  absent  from  them  for  so 
many  years,  and  never  write  to  the  Romans  as  Paul  did  to 
establish  their  faith,  and  not  even  mention  them  in  his  Epis- 
tles. 

Such  is  the  silence  of  Scripture  relative  to  Peter's  resi- 
dence at  Rome,  and  such  the  obscurity  of  primitive  antiquity 
about  it,  that  whilst  we  will  not  affirm  that  he  never  was  in 
that  city,  it  is  highly  improbable  that  he  lived  there  so  soon 
after  the  death  of  Christ,  and  for  so  long  a  period  as  Papists 
would  have  us  believe.  There  is  not  a  particle  of  positive 
proof  extant  to  show  that  Peter  was  ever  bishop  of  Rome, 
whilst  there  is  abundant  evidence  of  the  contrary.  The 
third  point,  whether  the  Popes  are  Peter's  successors,  we 
reserve  until  the  close  of  the  following  sections. 


SUCCESSION  IN  THE  PRIMACY.  231 

CHAPTER  XXIV. 

Concerning  the  successor  of  Peter  in  the  Primacy.  (92.) 

*'  Did  any  one  succeed  Peter  in  the  primacy  of  the  church  ? 

"  The  affirmative  is  a  matter  of  faith,  and  is  proved  in 
this  vi^ay :  Christ  the  Lord  instituted  the  church,  so  that  it 
should  endure  to  the  end  of  time ;  therefore,  he  must  have 
instituted  in  it  a  perpetual  form  of  government ;  and  thus 
at  the  death  of  Peter  another  must,  by  divine  appointment, 
succeed,  who  should  be  the  visible  head  of  the  church,  and 
Christ's  Vicar. 

"  Besides,  Peter  was  appointed  the  foundation  of  a  church, 
that  was  to  endure  perpetually:  therefore,  the  foundation 
should  be  perpetual ;  the  keys  also  and  the  government  must 
continue,  whilst  the  kingdom  endures ;  a  pastor  and  ruler 
are  necessary  for  the  sheep  ;  therefore  the  primacy  of  Peter 
must  continue  whilst  the  church  continues. 

"  Nor  is  it  any  objection  that  S.  Gregory  the  Great,  Bk.  5. 
Epist.  20 — alias  32,  condemns  the  name  of  universal  bishop, 
saying  that  it  is  a  blasphemous  name.  For  St.  Gregory 
means  that  it  is  blasphemous  in  this  sense,  as  though  one 
man  were  bishop  of  the  whole  church,  and  the  rest  were 
not  true  bishops  of  their  own  churches ;  and  hence,  Bk.  7. 
Epist.  79,  he  speaks  thus  :  *  If  one  man  is  universal  (bishop), 
it  remains  that  you  cannot  be  bishops.'  Otherwise,  if  by  the 
universal  bishop,  you  understand  the  Supreme  Head,  even  of 
Bishops,  you  will  properly  call  the  successor  of  Peter,  uni- 
versal Bishop. 

"It  is  to  be  observed,  however,  that  St.  Gregory  lays 
great  stress  upon  the  novelty  of  this  name,  principally 
because  the  Constantinopolitan  bishop  arrogantly  usurped  to 
himself  the  name  of  universal  bishop,  to  whom  it  certainly 
by  no  means  pertained. 

"  Who  is  this  successor  of  Peter  ? 

"  It  is  a  matter  of  faith  that  he  is  the  Roman  Pontiff.  It 
is  proved  from  the  unwavering  decree  of  general  councils  and 
of  the  church,  and  from  the  doctrine  of  the  Holy  Fathers ; 


232  SUCCESSION  IN  THE  PRIMACY. 

so  that  on  this  account  St.  Augustine  says,  that  this  con- 
tinuous succession  from  the  very  seat  of  Peter  kept  him  in 
the  Catholic  Church. 

"  This  succession,  down  to  this  day  in  which  Gregory  XVI. 
reigns,  is  continued  in  a  series  of  258  Pontiffs. 

"As  the  primacy  of  the  church  is  by  divine  right,  has  it 
also  been  annexed  by  divine  right  to  the  Bishopric ;  so  that 
the  particular  Roman  Episcopate  cannot  be  separated  from 
the  Supreme  Pontificate,  but  to  the  end  of  the  world,  is  the 
succession  of  Supreme  Pontiffs  to  continue  in  the  Roman 
Bishops  ? 

"  Ans.  This  is  a  controverted  point :  some  suppose  that 
the  primacy  is  annexed  to  the  Roman  Episcopate  only  by 
human  right;  they  say  indeed  that  it  has  been  merely 
ordained  by  Christ,  that  the  Episcopate  should  have  the  pri- 
macy, which  the  church  should  designate :  but  the  church 
has  designated  the  Roman  Episcopate ;  and  hence,  they  say, 
it  may  happen  by  the  disposition  of  the  Church,  that  the 
primacy  may  be  taken  away  from  the  Roman  Episcopate. 

"  But  it  is  more  commonly  maintained  that  the  primacy 
has  been  annexed  to  the  Roman  Episcopate  by  divine  right ; 
because,  although  the  most  weighty  reasons  were  urgent, 
such  as  were  the  persecutions  of  the  Gentiles,  and  the 
devastations  of  Rome,  yet  the  thought  never  was  harboured 
of  separating  the  Pontificate  from  the  Roman  Episcopate ; 
therefore  the  church  has  thought  that  the  primacy  has,  by 
divine  right,  been  annexed  to  the  Roman  Episcopate. 

"  Observe,  that  this  question  is  different  and  independent 
from  these  two,  which  are  settled  in  the  faith,  that  the  pri- 
macy of  the  church  is  of  divine  right,  and  that  this  primacy 
should  continue  in  the  Roman  Bishop,  or  Pope." 

Concerning  the  Power  of  the  Supreme  Pontiff.  (93.) 

"  From  whom  does  the  Pope,  legitimately  elected,  receive 
his  power  and  jurisdiction  ? 

"  Ans.  He  receives  it  immediately  from  Christ  as  his 
Vicar,  just  as  Peter  received  it. 

"  Nor  is  it  any  objection  that  the  pope  is  elected  by  cardi- 
nals ;  for  their  election  is  only  an  essential  requisite,  which 
being  supplied,  he  receives  power  and  jurisdiction  imme- 
diately from  Christ. 


SUCCESSION  IN  THE  PRIMACY.  233 

"  From  whom  do  the  Bishops  receive  the  power  of  juris- 
diction ] 

"  Ans.  The  French  contend  that  they  receive  it  imme- 
diately from  Christ;  but  it  seems  that  it  ought  rather  to  be 
said  that  they  receive  it  immediately  from  the  Roman  Pon- 
tiff, because  the  government  of  the  church  is  monarchical, 
&c.,  &c. 

What  and  how  great  is  the  Power  of  the  Supreme 
Pontiff,     (94.) 

"  What  power  has  the  Roman  Pontiff? 

"  We  reply  with  St.  Thomas,  &c. :  '  The  Pope  has  pleni- 
TTJDB  OF  power  IN  THE  CHURCH ;'  SO  that  his  power  extends 
to  all  who  are  in  the  church,  and  to  all  things  which  pertain 
to  the  government  of  the  church. 

*'  This  is  proved  from  what  was  said  before :  because  the 
Roman  Pontiff  is  the  true  Vicar  of  Christ,  the  head  of  the 
whole  church,  the  pastor  and  teacher  ;  therefore,  &c. 

"  Hence  it  follows,  that  all  the  faithful,  even  bishops  and 
patriarchs,  are  obliged  to  obey  the  Roman  Pontiff;  also, 
that  he  must  be  obeyed  in  all  things  which  concern  the 
Christian  religion,  and  therefore,  in  faith  and  customs,  in 
rites,  ecclesiastical  discipline,  &c. 

"  Hence,  the  perverse  device  of  the  Quesnellites  falls  to 
the  ground ;  namely,  that  the  pope  is  not  to  be  obeyed,  ex- 
cept in  those  things  which  he  enjoins  conformably  to  Sacred 
Scripture. 

"  Has  the  Supreme  Pontiff  not  only  directive,  but  also 
compulsory  power  over  all  the  faithful? 

"  Ans.  Yes;  because,  Matt.  xvi.  19,  the  power  of  binding, 
which  pertains  to  compulsory  authority,  is  given  to  Peter 
and  his  successors.  Perpetual  custom  also  confirms  this , 
hence,  the  power  of  suspending,  excommunicating,  &c., 
belongs  to  the  Supreme  Pontiff. 

*'  ObJ.  Christ  says,  Luke  xxii.  25,  *  The  kings  of  the 
Gentiles  lord  it  over  them' — v.  26,  '  But  you  not  so  ;'  there- 
fore, coercive  power  does  not  belong  to  ecclesiastics. 

"  Ans.  I  deny  the  inference ;  for  it  is  merely  forbidden 
that  they  govern  in  the  manner  of  Gentile  kings ;  and  hence 
he  adds :  '  But  you  not  so ;'  that  is,  they  should  not  rule 
20 


234  SUCCESSION  IN  THE  PRIMACY. 

tyrannically  and  haughtily,  seek  their  own  advantage,  glory, 
&;c.  in  ruling." 

The  following  section  (95)  discusses  the  question  whether 
the  Pope  is  superior  to  a  general  council. 

"The  question  is  not  concerning  a  council  assembled 
together  with  the  Pope :  for  in  this  case  the  pontiff  cannot 
be  above  the  council,  as  he  must  then  be  superior  to  him- 
self; but  he  is  of  equal  authority  with  the  council. 

*'  It  is  asked,  therefore,  whether  a  general  council  taken 
by  itself  without  the  Pope,  but  yet  lawfully  assembled,  is 
above  the  pontiff? 

"  The  French  maintain  the  affirmative :  out  of  France  it 
is  commonly  affirmed  that  the  Pope  is  superior  to  a  general 
council,  so  that  he  may  transfer,  dissolve  it,  &c. 

"This  is  proved :  Christ  said  to  Peter,  not  to  the  council ; 
*  I  will  give  to  thee  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven ; 
feed  my  sheep,'  &c.  Peter,  therefore,  and  his  successors 
are  the  head  and  pastor,  not  only  of  the  church  in  its  dis- 
persed state,  or  of  single  believers,  but,  also,  of  the  church 
assembled  in  council :  for  the  head  is  superior  not  only  to 
each  member  particularly  but  taken  together :  the  shepherd 
governs  and  is  superior  not  only  to  each  sheep  in  particular, 
but  to  the  whole  flock :  and  hence  the  Chalcedonian  Coun- 
cil in  a  letter  to  Pope  Leo  acknowledges  him  as  their  head 
and  father,"  &c. 

Concerning  the  Infallibility  of  the  Supreme  Pontiff.  (96.) 

"  It  is  to  be  premised  that  the  Pope  is  sometimes  said  to 
speak  or  determine  ex  cathedra,  but  sometimes  not,  but  as  a 
private  doctor,  or  as  replying  to  a  particular  question  or 
case. 

"  He  is  regarded  as  speaking  ex  cathedra,  (from  the 
throne)  when  he  speaks  from  the  plenitude  of  power,  pre- 
scribing to  the  whole  church  anything  as  a  doctrine  to  be 
believed  by  faith,  or  observed  in  customs,  or  accepted  as 
good  or  religious. 

"  Is  the  opinion  of  the  Supreme  Pontiff  of  infallible  au- 
thority 1 

"  The  Supreme  Pontiff  just  as- an  entire  general  council 
may  err  in  mere  facts,  or  in  things  not  concerning  faith  or 


SUCCESSION  IN  THE  PRIMACY.  235 

customs  :  because  infallibility  in  such  things  is  not  necessary 
for  the  government  of  the  church,  nor  does  a  mistake  injure 
the  integrity  of  religion. 

"  He  may  also  err,  when  he  does  not  speak  ex  cathedra : 
and  thus,  if  a  work  on  theology  or  law  is  published  by  the 
Supreme  Pontiff,  there  may  possibly  be  errors  in  it :  because 
it  bears  no  other  authority  before  itself  than  that  of  a  pri- 
vate doctor ;  as  Benedict  XIV.  declares  concerning  his  own 
works  in  a  brief  to  James  Facciolatus,  which  he  wished  to 
have  prefixed  to  the  first  volume.  A  mistake  may  possibly 
be  found  in  some  decrees  entered  upon  the  canonical  law : 
because,  although  those  decrees  are  entered  upon  the  canoni- 
cal law,  that  the  judges  might  have  some  rule  in  judging, 
yet  the  pontiffs  do  not  present  them  all  as  definitions  of  the 
faith. 

"  The  Supreme  Pontiff  determining  from  the  throne  mat- 
ters relating  to  faith  or  customs  is  infallible :  which  infalli- 
bility proceeds  from  the  special  assistance  of  the  Holy 
Spirit." 

The  three  following  passages  of  Scripture  are  then  ad- 
duced as  proofs  that  the  pope  is  infallible.  Matt.  xvi.  18. 
"  Thou  art  Peter,"  &c.  Luke  xxii.  32.  "  I  have  prayed  for 
thee  that  thy  faith  fail  not,  and  thou,  when  once  thou  art 
converted,  strengthen  thy  brethren  ;"  where  Christ  promises 
Peter  indefectibility  that  he  may  confirm  his  brethren  in  the 
faith :  which  belongs  to  the  office  of  pastor  and  head,  and 
thus,  also,  to  the  successors  of  Peter. 

"  It  is  proved  3d  from  John  xxi.  17.,  where  it  is  enjoined 
upon  Peter  and  consequently  on  his  successors  that  they  feed 
and  rule  the  whole  church :  therefore  the  whole  church  is 
bound  to  hear  and  to  follow  the  doctrine  of  the  pontiff:  and 
hence  if  he  can  err,  the  whole  church  will  err,  which  can- 
not happen,  according  to  No.  80,  &c.,  &c. 

"  ObJ.  I.  The  Pope  may  err  in  matters  of  faith  and  cus- 
toms if  he  does  not  apply  the  necessary  diligence:  but  it  is 
possible  that  he  may  not  apply  the  necessary  diligence: 
therefore  he  may  err. 

"  Ans.  The  same  arguments  may  be  framed  against  the 
infallibility  of  a  general  council,  which  yet  by  the  confes- 
sion of  our  adversaries  would  not  be  conclusive :  therefore, 
it  is  also  not  conclusive  against  the  infallibility  of  the  pope. 


236  SUCCESSION  IN  THE  PRIMACY. 

"  We  say,  therefore,  that  the  Pope,  just  as  llic  general 
council,  ought  to  apply  the  necessary  diligence  to  proceed 
prudently:  but  yet  that  the  infallibility  neither  of  the  pope 
nor  of  the  council  depends  on  the  condition  that  they  have 
proceeded  carefully  ;  it  is  justly  taken  for  granted,  however, 
that  all  diligence  has  been  applied  in  determining. 

"  Ohj.  11.  Therefore,  general  councils  are  useless :  for 
the  Pope,  as  he  is  infallible,  may  by  himself  determine  all 
controversies  about  faith  and  customs  by  a  judgment  that 
cannot  be  improved. 

"  Ans.  I  deny  the  inference :  by  way  of  proof,  it  is  to 
be  remarked  that,  although  the  Pope  is  infallible,  yet  he 
ought  not  to  neglect  human  and  ordinary  means,  by  which 
he  may  arrive  at  the  knowledge  of  the  truth  of  the  thing  in 
debate :  but  the  ordinary  means  is  a  greater  or  less  council 
as  the  importance  of  the  case  demands,  &c.,  &c. 

"  Various  pontiffs  are  cited  as  objections,  who  are  accused 
of  error  in  decrees  concerning  the  faith  or  customs. 

"  Ans.  It  is  to  be  observed  generally  for  the  solution  (of 
this  difficulty,)  that  this  error  is  either  in  mere  facts,  or  in 
things  not  pertaining  to  faith  and  customs,  or  in  decrees 
which  are  not  ex  cathedra,  and,  therefore,  they  do  not  at  all 
hinder  the  conclusion,  just  as,  also,  the  personal  failings  of 
the  Popes  are  no  objection." 

Whether  the  Pope  at  least  as  a  private  person  may  be  a 
heretic?   (97.) 

"  Although  this  would  be  no  impediment  to  the  preceding 
conclusion,  as  has  been  said,  yet  the  negative  opinion  seems 
the  more  probable,  so  that  the  privilege  of  Peter,  Luke  xxii. 
32 :  *  I  have  prayed  for  thee  that  thy  faith  fail  not,'  may 
also  be  transferred  to  the  successors  of  Peter  ;  and  it  is 
agreeable  to  divine  providence,  that  he  who  is  a  teacher  of 
the  faith,  should  himself  not  fail  from  the  faith. 

"It  is  proved  also  by  this,  that  it  could  never  yet  be 
proved  concerning  any  Pope,  that  he  was  a  formal  heretic  ; 
and  this,  St.  Augustine,  Epist.  165,  concerning  the  Popes, 
attests  up  to  his  own  times. 

"  Obj.  I.  Marcellinus,  under  Dioclesian,  burnt  incense  to 
an  idol,  therefore,  &c. 

"  Ans.  Augustine,  and  after  him,  Baronius,  Bellarmine, 


THE  POPE  CANNOT  BE  A  HERETIC.  237 

Christianus  Lupus,  &;c.,  say,  that  this  lapse  of  Marcellinus 
is  a  fiction  fabricated  by  the  Donatists ;  Binius  Schelstra- 
tius  and  others,  who  admit  the  lapse,- say  that  Marcellinus 
burnt  incense  to  idols  through  fear  of  death,  and  therefore 
that  he  sinned  against  the  profession  of  faith,  but  did  not 
lose  the  faith  internally. 

"  Obj.  11.  Pope  Liberius  subscribed  to  the  Syrmian  for- 
mula of  faith,  prepared  by  the  Arians,  and  the  condemnation 
of  Athanasius,  who  held  the  true  faith ;  therefore  he  was  a 
heretic. 

"  Ans.  I  deny  the  inference :  it  is  indeed  true  that  Libe- 
rius was  sent  into  exile  on  account  of  the  Catholic  faith,  and 
that  at  length,  overcome  by  calamities,  and  protracted  mis- 
fortune, he  communicated  with  the  Arians,  and  subscribed 
the  condemnation  of  Athanasius,  not  for  the  sake  of  his 
faith,  but  on  account  of  accusations  falsely  laid  to  his  charge 
by  the  Arians. 

*'  He  afterwards  subscribed  to  the  Syrnnian  formula,  which, 
(notwithstanding  it  did  not  sufficiently  explain  the  faith,) 
contained  nothing  contrary  to  the  faith,  although  in  it  the 
word  consuhstantial  was  suppressed ;  from  which,  therefore, 
it  cannot  be  proved  that  Liberius  was  a  heretic,  although  he 
may  not  be  excused  from  sin  in  the  manner  of  acting. 

"There  are  not  wanting  some,  however,  who  regard  the 
lapse  of  Liberius  as  a  mere  fable,  circulated  by  the  Arians, 
and  believed  by  a  few  Catholics,  as  is  commonly  the  case. 
See  Collet,  &c. 

"  Ohj.  in.  Honorius  L  was  a  Monothelite ;  therefore,  &:c. 

"  The  antecedent  is  proved ;  because,  in  a  letter  to  Ser- 
gius,  he  teaches  that  in  Christ  there  was  one  will  and  not 
two. 

"  Ans.  I  deny  the  antecedent :  for  proof,  it  is  said  that  in 
these  letters,  he  did  not  deny  that  in  Christ  there  are  two 
wills,  divine  and  human  ;  but  he  only  denied  that  there  were 
two  human  wills  warrinar  against  each  other,  the  one  of  the 
nesh,  the  other  of  the  spirit;  such  as  we  find  in  ourselves, 
by  which,  from  our  depraved  nature,  the  flesh  lusts  against 
the  Spirit :  and  he  enjoined  that  they  should  abstain  from  the 
words, '  one  or  two  wills,'  lest  from  the  different  interpretation 
of  the  words,  a  schism  might  arise. 
20* 


238  THE  POPE  CANNOT  BE  A  HERETIQ. 

*'You  will  urge:  the  Sixth  Synod  condemned  Honorius 
as  a  heretic ;  therefore,  &c. 

"  Ans.  Sylvius,  with  some  others,  contends  that  the  acts 
of  this  Synod  have  been  corrupted,  and  the  name  of  Hono- 
rius substituted  in  place  of  Theodorus :  but  this  plea,  Tho- 
massinus  refutes  in  a  learned  manner,  in  his  20th  dissertation 
on  Synod  6. 

"  Others  say  that  the  sixth  Synod,  in  condemning  Honorius, 
erred,  namely,  by  a  mistake  of  a  merely  personal  fact,  not 
about  the  literal  sense  of  the  dogmatical  texts ;  for,  they  say, 
the  judgment  of  the  Synod  was  merely  criminal,  not  dog- 
matical :  for  the  question  was  principally  concerning  the  per- 
son of  Honorius ;  and  hence,  his  letters  were  not  primarily 
discussed,  in  order  that  inquiry  might  be  made  concerning 
doctrine,  but  only  that  the  person  might  be  judged  ;  in  which 
judgment  it  was  admitted,  No.  84,  that  the  church  might  em 

"Others  say,  that  Honorius,  in  the  sixth  Synod,  was  con- 
demned as  a  favourer  of  heresy,  but  not  as  a  heretic;  and 
the  fact  favours  this  opinion,  that  Leo  II.,  who  confirmed  the 
Synod,  in  various  passages,  blames  only  the  negligence  and 
imprudence  of  Honorius,  by  which  he  permitted  the  .immacu- 
late faith  to  be  stained ;  also  that  Constantine  Pogonatus,  the 
emperor,  who  was  present  at  this  Council,  condemns  Ho- 
norius as  the  favourer,  abettor,  and  confirmer  of  heresy.  It 
is  indeed  true  that  an  anathema  was  pronounced  upon  Ho- 
norius as  a  heretic ;  but  the  Fathers  seem  not  to  have  dis- 
tinguished between  heretics  and  the  favourers  of  heresy  ,*  at 
least,  the  very  words  of  the  Fathers  blame  the  connivance 
of  Honorius,  rather  than  his  open  profession  of  heresy. 

"  Obj.  IV.  Dist.  46  Can.  If  the  Pope,  &c.  :  the  Pope  is 
said  to  judge  all  persons,  and  to  be  judged  by  none,  unless  he 
shall  be  detected  deviating  from  the  faith  ;  therefore,  he  may 
be  a  formal  heretic. 

"  Ans.  I  deny  the  inference :  for  it  is  only  said  what  may 
be  done  in  case  that  the  Pope  fails  from  the  faith ;  but  we 
think  that  this  case  never  has  happened,  and  never  will 
occur." 


TEMPORAL  POV/ER  OF  THE  POPE.  239 


Concerning  the  Temporal  Power  of  the  Supreme 
Pontiff.     (98.) 

"  Has  the  Supreme  Pontiff  also  a  certain  temporal  and 
civil  power? 

"  J./IS.  It  is  certain  that  he  has  even  direct  power  in 
places  subject  to  him  by  temporal  dominion.  For  it  is  no 
objection  that  the  same  person  is  an  ecclesiastical  chief,  and 
a  political  one  in  temporal  things,  as  appears  in  Melchize- 
dech,  the  Machabees,  &c. 

"  Has  the  Pope  also  temporal  power  over  all  kingdoms  of 
the  world  1 

"  Ans.  There  have  been  those,  as  Bellarmine  shows,  Bk.  5, 
concerning  the  Roman  Pontiff,  who  ascribed  to  the  Pontiff 
by  divine  right  the  most  plenary  and  direct  power  over  the 
whole  world,  as  well  in  temporal  as  in  spiritual  things ;  but 
this  opinion  is  rejected  by  all. 

*'  Bellarmine,  Sylvius,  and  others,  say  that  the  Pope  has 
not  by  divine  right  direct  power  over  temporal  kingdoms, 
but  indirect ;  that  is,  wheji  the  spiritual  power  cannot  be 
freely  exercised,  nor  his  object  be  attained,  by  spiritual, 
then  he  may  have  recourse  to  temporal  means,  according 
to  St.  Thomas,  22,  9,  10,  a  12,  s.  q.  12,  a  2,  who  teaches 
that  princes  may  sometimes  be  deprived  of  their  rule,  and 
their  subjects  be  liberated  from  the  oath  of  fidelity  ;  and 
thus  it  has  been  done  by  Pontiffs  more  than  once. 

"  The  other  opinion  teaches  that  kings  and  princes  in 
temporal  concerns  are  by  no  means  subject  to  pontifical  and 
ecclesiastical  power,  and  that  they  cannot  be  deposed  directly 
or  indirectly  by  the  authority  of  the  keys,  and  that  their  sub- 
jects cannot  be  relieved  from  faith  and  obedience,  or  absolved 
from  the  oath  of  fidelity  which  they  have  taken.  Thus  the 
''■^claration  of  the  Galilean  clergy,  in  the  year  1682,  asserts, 
which  many  foreign  (clergy)  follow.  The  treatise  of  Bellar- 
mine, concerning  the  power  of  the  Supreme  Pontiff  in  tem- 
poral concerns,  against  Barclay,  the  Parisian  senate  had  con- 
demned already  in  1610,  as  may  be  seen  in  Tournely." 

The  claim  of  the  Pope  to  universal  spiritual  supremacy 
upon  earth,  is,  if  possible,  even  still  more  absurd  than  the 


240  SUPREMACY  OF  THE  FOPE. 

plea  which  is  offered  for  the  primacy  of  Peter.  If  the  Pope 
is  the  successor  of  Peter,  it  must  be  either  in  his  pecuhar 
office  as  apostle,  or  as  Bishop  of  Rome,  or  as  the  Head  of 
the  Church :  but  he  cannot  succeed  Peter  as  an  apostle,  for 
the  apostolic  office  was  not  continued  after  the  death  of  the 
twelve,  whom  Christ  himself  appointed,  as  they  neither  con- 
stituted any  others  to  succeed  them  in  that  office,  nor  had  they 
authority  to  do  so.  He  cannot  succeed  him  as  Bishop  of 
Rome,  for  it  never  yet  has  been  proved  that  Peter  held  that 
office,  but  on  the  contrary  there  is  abundant  presumptive  evi- 
dence of  the  very  strongest  character  to  show  that  he  could 
not  have  been  the  Bishop  of  any  Church  at  Rome.  The 
Pope  cannot  succeed  Peter  as  the  Head  of  the  Church,  for 
Peter  never  was  appointed  as  such,  and  never  claimed  to  be 
Christ's  vicar  upon  earth.  He  expressed  his  concern  that 
the  things  he  presented  might  "  always  be  had  in  remem- 
brance after  his  decease,"  but  neither  he  nor  any  other  in- 
spired writer  alludes  even  in  the  most  distant  manner  to  his 
giving  a  commission  to  the  Bishops  of  Rome  to  succeed  him  ; 
but  he  certainly  would  not  have  failed  to  mention  in  precise 
and.  explicit  terms  the  nature  of  his  supremacy,  nor  could 
the  other  apostles  have  been  utterly  silent  in  relation  to  it,  if 
he  and  his  successors  had  been  appointed  as  Christ's  vicars 
upon  earth  to  the  end  of  time.  We  may  rest  assured  that 
if  the  doctrine  of  the  Pope's  supremacy  were  really  taught 
in  the  Bible,  it  would  have  been  declared  in  terms  as  precise 
and  definite  as  justification  by  faith  or  the  resurrection  from 
the  dead. 

But  not  only  are  the  Scriptures  silent  in  relation  to  this 
subject,  but"  no  authority  can  be  gathered  from  the  testimony 
of  the  purest  antiquity  to  sustain  this  strange  and  presump- 
tuous claim  of  the  Romish  Church.  Which  of  the  early 
fathers  plainly  declare  in  so  many  words,  or  in  language  that 
unequivocally  imports  that  Christ  constituted  Peter  the  uni- 


SUPREMACY  OF  THE  POPE.  241 

versal  Bishop  of  his  Church,  and  the  Bishops  of  Rome  his 
successors  in  that  office  1 

How  strange  it  is,  if  they  recognised  an  infallible  Head 
upon  earth,  that  they  should  have  toiled  and  laboured  so  as- 
siduously to  compose  elaborate  confutations  of  heretics,  when 
there  was  a  visible  infallible  guide  to  whom  every  difficulty 
might  have  been  referred,  and  from  whose  decision  none  who 
professed  to  acknowledge  the  authority  of  Christ  and  the  Holy 
Scriptures  could  possibly  appeal  ?  But  when  do  they  ever 
refer  heretics  to  such  a  judge  of  controversy  1  When?  The 
testimony  of  many  of  the  writers,  whom  Papists  designate 
as  belonging  to  the  Fathers  of  the  Church,  is  of  very  little 
value,  inasmuch  as  they  were  interested  in  sustaining  abuses 
which  they  had  themselves  assisted  in  bringing  into  thechurch ; 
this  remark  will  not  generally  apply  to  the  standard-bearers 
of  the  First  and  Second  and  some  of  the  Third  and  even 
Fourth  Century,  but  after  that  period  very  many  of  the  Fa- 
thers are  witnesses  of  very  doubtful  reputation. 

It  is  amusing  to  see  the  perfect  nonchalance  with  which 
Peter  Dens  passes  over  the  most  formidable  objections  of  wri- 
ters, for  whose  authority  Romish  Priests  profess  the  greatest 
deference.  Thus,  when  Gregory  the  Great  condemns  the 
name  of  universal  Bishop  as  blasphemous,  there  is  a  "dis- 
tingue" at  hand,  which  explains  the  difficulty  at  once.  The 
whole  secret  of  the  case  was  that  Gregory  conceived  it  to  be 
blasphemous  in  the  Bishop  of  Constantinople  to  affect  a  dig- 
nity, for  which  he  was  himself  an  aspirant.  We  care  not 
for  his  opinion  except  in  so  far  as  his  indignant  rebuke  of  the 
Constantinopolitan  Bishop  is  some  proof  that  the  claim  to 
universal  supremacy  was  a  novelty  in  his  day. 

As  for  Peter's  supremacy,  it  is  plain  that  it  did  not  exone- 
rate him  from  subjection  to  his  brethren,  before  whom  he 
pleaded  his  cause,  and  by  w?iom  he  was  sent  as  a  messen- 
ger, Acts  viii.  14,  and  xi.  3.  Nor  did  his  infallibility  render 
him  proof  against  error,  for  which  Paul  withstood  him  to  his 


242  SUPREMACY  OF  THE  POPE. 

face,  Gal.  ii.  11.  And  though  Christ  prayed  for  Peter,  that 
his  faith  might  not  fail,  and  thus  rendered  him  and  his  suc- 
cessors indefectible,  yet  it  was  but  a  very  few  hours  after  the 
Saviour  had  thus  prayed  that  Peter  denied  him — denied  him 
thrice,  and  with  an  oath !  This  shows  surely  that  the  Lord 
Jesus  did  not  intend  by  this  expression  to  intimate  to  his  dis- 
ciple that  he  never  should  commit  an  error,  much  less  that 
his  successors  should  have  this  privilege ;  but  he  told  him 
that  he  had  prayed  for  him  that  his  faith  might  not  fail,  or 
in  other  words,  that  he  might  not  perish  as  a  castaway.  It 
is  evident  that  if  Christ  had  prayed  that  Peter  might  not  err 
either  in  faith  or  practice,  his  disciple  would  not  have  fallen 
into  the  sin  of  a  gross  and  aggravated  perjury  only  a  few 
hours  after  the  annunciation  of  his  confirmed  indefectibility. 
But  the  Pope  claims  "  plenitude  of  power  in  the  church,  so 
that  his  power  extends  to  all  who  are  in  the  church,  and  to 
all  things  which  pertain  to  the  government  of  the  church." 
*'  He  must  be  obeyed  in  all  things  which  concern  the  Chris- 
tian religion."  These  assertions,  although  extravagant 
enough,  are  not  quite  so  audacious  as  the  language  of  some 
other  approved  writers  of  the  Romish  Church.  Cardinal 
Zabar,  speaking  of  the  Popes,  affirms — "  That  they  might 
do  all  things  which  they  choose,  even  things  unlawful,  and 
so  could  do  more  than  God  himself"  The  canonists  re- 
peatedly compliment  the  Pope  as  "  Our  Lord  God,  the  Pope !" 
This  title  was  given  to  the  Pope  by  the  Council  of  Lateran, 
Sess.  4.  Gratian  asserts,  "  That  all  mortals  are  to  be  judged 
by  the  Pope,  but  the  Pope  by  nobody  at  all."  It  would  in- 
deed be  a  hard  matter  to  judge  him,  if  Massonus  be  sjood 
authority,  for  in  his  third  Book,  in  the  life  of  Pope  John  IX., 
he  tells  us  "  That  the  Bishops  of  Rome  cannot  commit  even 
sin  without  praise !  I"  Now,  I  do  not  wish  to  imply  that 
every  Romanist  would  approve  of  such  horrid  blasphemy  as 
this ;  it  is  more  than  enough  to  brand  their  church  with  in- 
famy, that  there  has  been  a  time  in  her  history  when  such 


SUPREMACY  OF  THE  POPE.  243 

writers  were  permitted  to  express  these  and  similar  sentiments 
without  rebuke ! 

The  supremacy  of  Peter  did  not  exempt  him  from  paying 
tribute  even  to  a  heathen,  Matt.  xvii.  27.  Strange  as  it  is, 
it  is  nevertheless  true  that  this  fact  is  mentioned  as  one  of 
the  prerogatives  of  Christ's  vicar;  Peter  Dens  actually  bases 
an  argument  for  the  supremacy  upon  this  fact ! !  If  the  Pope 
were  to  follow  Peter's  example  in  this  respect,  what  would 
become  of  the  Apostolic  See !  In  his  epistles,  Peter  urges 
many  precepts  of  obedience  to  princes — "  Submit  to  every 
ordinance  of  man,  whether  it  be  to  the  king  as  supreme,  or 
to  governors,"  &c.  1  Pet.  ii.  13.  But  the  Pope  not  only  de- 
nies obedience  to  any  earthly  sovereign,  but  even  in  this  en- 
lightened age,  His  Holiness  still  claims  the  right  of  depriv- 
ing princes  of  their  rule,  and  liberating  their  svbjectsfrom 
the  oath  of  fidelity  !  Whilst  the  ridiculous  c]aim  of  univer- 
sal temporal  supremacy  is  avowedly  repudiated,  the  Romish 
Priests  are  still  taught  by  their  theology,  "  When  the  Spirit- 
ual power  cannot  be  freely  exercised,  nor  his  (i.  e.,  the 
Pope's)  object  be  attained  by  Spiritual,  that  he  may  have 
recourse  to  temporal  means,  according  to  St.  Thomas,  who 
teaches  that  princes  may  sometimes  be  deprived  of  their 
rule,  and  their  subjects  be  liberated  from  the  oath  of  fidel- 
ity ;  and  thus  it  has  been  done  by  Pontiffs  more  than 
once  !  /"  (Sec.  98.) 

Thus  Pope  Zachary  deposed  Childeric,  King  of  France, 
and  set  up  Pepin  in  his  stead  !  Thus  Pope  Alexander  III., 
planting  his  foot  upon  the  neck  of  the  Emperor  Frederic  I., 
profanely  quoted  the  Scripture.  Ps.  xci.  13.  "Thou  shalt 
tread  upon  the  lion  and  the  adder,"  &c.  Thus  Pius  V.,  in 
the  insolent  Bull,  which  he  issued  as  a  declaration  of  Queen 
Elizabeth's  deposition,  and  by  which  her  subjects  were  ab- 
solved, forsooth  1  from  their  allegiance,  apglied  to  himself 
the  words,  "  See,  I  have  this  day  set  thee  over  the  nations,  and 
over  the  kingdoms,  to  root  out,  and  to  pull  down,  and  to  do- 


244  SUPREMACY  OF  THE  POPE. 

stroy,  and  to  throw  down,  to  build  and  to  plant."  Jer.  i.  10. 
This  is  "  submitting  to  every  ordinance  of  man,"  with  a  ven- 
geance ! 

Now  I  desire  to  call  attention  to  the  fact,  that  the  Pope 
still  claims,  by  divine  right,  indirect  power  over  all  the 
kingdoms  and  nations  of  the  earth.  His  priests  are  his 
sworn  subjects,  and  must  promote  the  interests  of  their  Lord 
God,  the  Pope,  or  they  are  perjured  men !  From  their  own 
principles,  therefore,  we  prove  the  system  of  Popery  to  be 
nothing  more  nor  less  than  a  politico-religious  power,  which 
must  aim  at  supremacy,  because  it  claims  it  as  its  due ! 

But  to  return  to  the  consideration  of  the  Pope's  claim  tc 
universal  supremacy.  Let  us  hear  the  story  of  his  succes- 
sion as  Romish  authors  relate  it.  Platina,  the  Secretary  of 
Pope  Sixtus  IV.,  who  wrote  the  lives  of  the  Popes,  tells  us 
that  Peter,  some  time  before  his  death,  consecrated  Clement, 
and  commended  him  to  the  chair  of  the  Church  of  God,  in 
these  very,  words :  "  The  same  power  of  binding  and  loosing 
I  deliver  to  thee,  which  Christ  left  me :  do  thou,  contemning 
and  despising  all  outward  things,  promote  by  prayer  and 
preaching  the  salvation  of  men,  as  becomes  a  good  pastor." 
Certam  it  is,  that  the  successors  of  Peter  have,  in  late  ages, 
grievously  neglected  and  forgotten  the  latter  part  of  this 
charge.  But  how  is  it,  after  this  formal  story,  related  no 
doubt  with  the  utmost  gravity,  that  the  same  author  mentions 
one  Linus  as  Peter's  immediate  successor,  and  tells  us  that 
he  occupied  the  chair  eleven  years,  three  months,  and  twelve 
days  exactly  J  and  after  him  a  certain  Cletus  was  Pope  for 
just  twelve  years,  one  month,  and  eleven  days ;  and  then, 
after  this  lapse  of  nearly  twenty-four  years,  honest  Father 
Clement  begins  to  occupy  the  seat  of  Peter,  and  holds  it  nine 
years,  two  months,  and  ten  days.  Now  this  story  twists  the 
line  of  succession  into  a  knot  at  the  very  outset ;  for  if  Pe- 
ter ordained  Clement  as  his  successor,  Linus  and  Cletus  had 
no  right  to  interfere  with  his  claim.     But  without  pressing 


SUPREMACY  OF  THE  POPE.  245 

this  point,  if  Peter  did  ordain  either  Clement  or  Linus,  or 
any  other  man  as  Head  of  the  Church,  then  he  either  divest- 
ed himself  of  that  authority,  and  became  subject  to  the  new 
Head,  or  else  from  that  time  to  his  death  the  Church  had 
two  visible  heads. 

Moreover,  if  Clement,  Linus,  or  any  one  else  succeeded 
Peter  in  the  primacy,  then  James  and  John,  and  the  other 
apostles,  who  survived  Peter,  became  subject  to  Clement  or 
Linus,  or  whoever  the  new  Head  might  be.  For  the  histo- 
rians, upon  whose  authority  Papists  mainly  rely,  tell  us  that 
Peter  suffered  under  Nero,  but  John  long  after  under  Domi- 
tian.  But  is  it  reasonable  to  suppose  that  the  men,  who 
were  called  by  Christ  himself  to  the  apostolic  office,  and 
who  are  represented  as  at  least  equal  with  Peter,  should  be- 
come inferior  and  subject  to  an  ordinary  pastor,  who  was 
called  by  man  and  not  by  Christ  to  the  primacy  1  How  then 
are  we  to  account  for  the  fact,  that  the  writings  of  James 
and  John  are  owned  by  the  Church  as  pertaining  to  the  ca- 
non of  Scripture,  whereas  the  writings  of  Clement  are  re- 
jected as  apocryphal  ? 

But  even  supposing  that  Christ  ordained  Peter,  and  Peter 
ordained  Linus  or  some  one  else,  what  has  this  to  do  with 
the  Popes  of  the  last  ages,  who  are  elected  by  the  Cardinals  ? 
From  whom  do  the  Cardinals  receive  their  power  ?  If  from 
God,  let  them  produce  a  "  thus  saith  the  Lord ;"  if  from 
men,  let  them  show  by  what  authority.  The  name  of  Car- 
dinal was  never  heard  of  in  the  church  till  the  8th  Century, 
and  it  was  not  till  the  11th  Century  that  they  were  formed 
into  a  regular  order  under  John  XVIII.,  if  ecclesiastical  his- 
tory is  to  be  credited.  Besides,  Platina,  the  Romish  historian, 
calls  this  John  *'  a  robber  and  a  thief  in  his  pontificate,"  and 
thinks  him  unworthy  to  be  "  placed  in  the  number  of  the 
Popes,"  having  assumed  the  pontifical  authority  while  Gre- 
gory V.  was  alive.  This  is  a  hopeful  origin  indeed  of  the 
blessed  order  of  Cardinals !  But  their  subsequent  history  is 
21 


246  SUPREMACY  OP^  THE  POPE. 

not  unworthy  of  their  parentage ;  for  he  is  very  ignorant,  who 
does  not  know  that  ambition  and  bribery,  and  the  influence 
and  interests  of  temporal  princes,  have  ruled  the  conclave, 
instead  of  the  blessed  Spirit  of  the  living  God ! 

And  then,  look  for  a  moment  at  the  uninterrupted  succes- 
sion of  the  *'  Series  of  258  Popes  !"  Is  it  not  notorious,  that 
for  several  years  there  was  no  Pope  at  all  ?  Do  we  not 
know  that  at  other  times  there  were  two  or  three  Popes  at 
once;  that  one  anathematized  another,  and  that  infallible 
Popes  and  Councils  have  condemned  several  of  the  occupants 
of  Peter's  chair  as  heretical  and  illegitimate  ?  Through  which 
of  these  channels  must  the  pure  stream  of  uninterrupted  suc- 
cession flow  ]  Some  of  these  Popes  must  be  spurious,  and 
amidst  this  endless  variety  of  contradictory  decrees,  who  can 
determine  which  were  the  true  successors  of  St.  Peter,  or 
whether  the  present  Pope  is  lawfully  descended  from  him? 

But  since  Papists  will  insist  upon  their  succession,  let  us 
see  if  Peter  Dens  is  authorized  to  say,  "that  it  could  never 
yet  be  proved,  concerning  any  Pope,  that  he  was  a  formal 
heretic !"  The  97ih  section,  in  which  the  question  is  dis- 
cussed, "  Whether  the  Pope,  at  least  as  a  private  person, 
may  be  a  heretic,"  is  a  model  of  Jesuitical  cunning. 
When  evidence  as  clear  as  the  sun  is  brought  forward  to 
controvert  a  doctrine,  which  Papists  must  maintain  at  all  ha- 
zards, there  are  distinguos  enough  at  hand  to  foil  every  ob- 
jection. But  if  we  admit,  for  argument's  sake,  that  Marcel- 
linus,  Liberius,  &c.,  were  not  heretics,  and  that  the  apology 
offered  for  them,  lame  as  it  is,  is  sufficient,  what  are  we  to 
think  of  John  XXII.,  who  denied  the  immortality  of  the  soul  ? 
What  say  our  Romish  friends  to  John  XXIII.,  Gregory  XII., 
and  Benedict  XIII.,  who  were  all  Popes  at  once,  and  were 
all  cashiered  by  the  Council  of  Constance  as  illegitimate  ? 
Did  not  the  Council  of  Basil  convict  Pope  Eugenius  both  of 
schism  and  heresy  ?  Was  not  Pope  Anastasius  excommu- 
nicated by  the  Roman  clergy  as  a  heretic?    Is  it  not  matter. 


SUPREMACY  OF  THE  POPE.  247 

of  historical  record,  that  Pope  Sylvester  sacrificed  to  the  de- 
vil, that  Pope  Formosus  obtained  the  chaii*  by  perjury,  that 
his  holiness,  Sergius  III.,  caused  another  Pope's  body  to  be 
digged  up  out  of  his  grave,  the  head  to  be  cut  off  and  thrown 
into  the  Tiber,  and  that  Pope  Boniface  iniprisoned  his  infal- 
lible predecessor  and  plucked  out  his  eyes  ? 

These  are  but  a  few  samples  of  the  immaculate  orthodoxy 
of  the  successors  of  St.  Peter !  Atheists  and  blasphemers, 
rebels  and  murderers,  conjurors  and  adulterers  supply  not  a 
few  of  the  links  of  this  apostolical  chain  !  No  wonder  that 
not  a  man  who  has  ever  occupied  the  papal  throne  has  ever 
presumed  to  bear  the  name  of  Peter  after  his  inauguration  ; 
even  when  they  had  formerly  been  known  by  that  name,  they 
changed  it  at  their  accession  to  the  chair !  Thus  Peter  de 
Tarantasia  became  Innocent  IV. ;  Peter  Carafa  changed  his 
name  to  Paul  V. ;  and  Sergius  III.  was  once  a  Peter  too. 
This  fact  would  seem  to  imply  that  these  men  must  have 
been  conscious  of  the  vast  disparity  between  Peter  the  Pope, 
and  Peter  the  apostle !  It  is  not  without  reason,  certainly, 
that  the  anecdote  is  related  of  the  famous  painter,  Raphael 
Urbin,  who,  when  reproved  by  the  Pope  for  putting  too  much 
colour  on  the  faces  of  Peter  and  Paul,  replied,  that  he  did  it 
on  purpose  to  represent  them  as  blushing  in  heaven  to  see 
what  successors  they  had  on  the  earth ! 


CHAPTER  XXV. 

The  Treatises  on  the  virtue  of  hope  and  the  virtue  of 
charity,  which  constitute  the  2d  and  3d  parts  of  the  second 
volume,  although  marked  by  a  few  peculiarities,  contain  no- 
thing which  would  be  specially  interesting  to  the  general 
reader,  and  I  therefore  omit  them.  The  Treatise  concerning 
Right  and  Justice,  which  occupies  a  large  portion  of  the  thir*^ 


S48  CONCERNING  THEFT  AND  RAPINE. 

volume,  presents  amongst  other  things  sound  practical 
casuistry  in  a  variety  of  cases  in  which  restitution  should 
be  made,  about  which,  however,  there  could  be  very  little 
debate  among  men  of  common  honesty.  The  88th,  and 
the  following  sections  of  this  tre^itise  may  speak  for  them- 
selves. 

Concerning  the  grievousness  of   the   sin  of   theft    and 
rapine.   (88.) 

"  How  great  a  sin  are  theft  and  rapine  ? 

"  Ans.  They  are  from  their  very  nature  mortal  sins. 
It  is  proved  from  1  Cor.  vi.  10.,  where  it  is  said :  '  nor 
thieves,  nor  extortioners  shall  possess  the  kingdom  of  God :' 
besides  they  are  grievously  repugnant  to  the  love  and  justice 
of  our  neighbour,  and  tend  to  overturn  the  common  peace. 

"  Obj,  Prov.  vi.  30.  It  is  said,  '  The  fault  is  not  so  great, 
when  a  man  hath  stolen :  for  he  stealeth  to  fill  his  hungry 
soul.' 

"  St.  Thomas  replies  to  this :  I.  '  It  must  be  said  that  theft 
is  declared  to  be  not  a  great  fault  for  a  twofold  reason. 
First,  indeed,  on  account  of  the  necessity  inducing  to  theft, 
which  diminishes  or  totally  removes  the  fault.  And  hence, 
it  is  added  :  for  he  stealeth  to  fill  his  hungry  soul.  Theft 
is  said  in  another  mode  not  to  be  a  great  fault  by  compari- 
son with  the  guilt  of  adultery,  which  is  punished  with  death. 
And  hence  it  is  added,  concerning  the  thief,  that  if  he  be 
taken  he  shall  restore  sevenfold :  but  he  that  is  an  adulterer 
shall  destroy  his  own  soul.' 

"  In  how  many  ways  may  theft  be  venial  1 

"  Principally  in  two  ways :  namely,  from  the  imperfect 
deliberation  of  the  act ;  and  from  the  trifling  value  of  the 
matter. 

"  The  former  mode  is  not  easily  imagined  in  the  external 
removal*  of  the  property  of  another,  but  it  may  more  readily 
be  done  by  inflicting  injury,  and  by  internal  acts.  The 
theft,  for  instance,  of  a  single  farthing  is  venial  by  reason 
of  the  small  value  of  the  thing. 

"  Some  add  two  other  modes,  1.  From  ignorance  slightly 
culpable^  that  the  thing  was  the  property  of  another. 
"  2.  That  the  owner  in  an  important  matter  is  not  much 


CONCERNING  THEFT  AND  RAPINE.  249 

opposed,  but  is  unwilling  only  as  to  the  mode  of  taking  it. 
But  these  two  ways  may  be  absolutely  reduced  to  the  trifling 
value  of  the  thing ;  because,  although  a  thing  may  be  im- 
portant in  itself,  yet  in  the  degree  of  this  theft,  it  may  be 
said  to  be  of  little  moment. 

"  The  theft  of  a  trifling  thing  may  become  mortal  in  vari- 
ous ways,  as  will  be  shown  hereafter. 

"  What  quantity  is  requisite  before  a  theft  can  be  mortal 
in  regard  to  its  matter? 

"  Ans.  Certain  authors  refer  the  quantity  respectively  to 
the  persons,  upon  whom  the  loss  is  inflicted :  so  that  a  thing 
may  be  a  mortal  matter  if  it  is  taken  from  a  poor  person, 
which  would  not  be  mortal  if  it  were  taken  from  a  rich  man ; 
but  this  in  our  day  appears  antiquated,  and  the  absolute 
quantity  is  now  usually  determined  not  by  considering  whe- 
ther the  person  from  whom  it  may  be  taken  is  rich  or  poor : 
the  reason  is  that  the  richer  has  not  a  less  right  over  his 
property  than  the  poorer  person ;  and,  therefore,  when  an 
equal  quantity  is  taken  from  both  sides,  injury  is  in  so  far 
inflicted,  not  less  on  the  richer  than  on  the  poorer. 

"  With  these  remarks  the  fact  agrees  that  the  penitent  in 
confession  ought  to  declare,  whether  he  has  taken  the  thing 
from  a  poor  or  from  a  rich  man  :  but  this  is  not  in  regard 
o  the  theft,  but  on  account  of  the  inconvenience  and  the 
consequences,  which  usually  proceed  from  a  theft  committed 
on  a  poor  man ;  as,  his  earnings  being  suspended,  loss  ac- 
cruing, hunger,  grief,  &c. :  but  all  these  things  are  apart 
from  the  theft. 

"  If  you  say  that  a  rich  man  is  not  so  unwilling  as  to  the 
theft  of,  for  instance,  24  farthings :  I  reply  that  he  must  be 
presumed  to  be  unwilling  in  proportion  to  the  amount.  That 
if  it  is  admitted  that  the  owner  is  not  much  opposed,  then 
indeed  it  may  become  venial,  as  was  said  above:  but  inde- 
pendently of  the  question,  whether  the  owner  is  rich  or  poor. 

"  What  quantity  appears  absolutely  sufficient  for  mortal 
theft  in  regard  to  amount  ? 

"  The  more  common  and  plausible  opinion  reckons  that 
the  hire  or  daily  wages  of  a  man  labouring  in  some  honour- 
able trade  is  sufficient ;  that  is  three  or  four  shillings  for 
this  lime  and  for  this  country ;  because,  in  proportion  as 
daily  labour  is  accounted  severe,  the  pay  is  correspondent. 
21* 


250  CONCERNING  THEFT  AND  RAPINE. 

"  It  is  said,  three  or  four  shillings  ;  because  this  quantity 
cannot  be  physically  or  mathematically  determined,  but  only 
morally ;  '  and  perhaps  it  is  concealed  for  this  reason;'  says 
St.  August.  (Bk.  xxi.  de  Civ.  Dei.  last  chap.,)  Mest  the 
desire  might  abate  of  improving  so  as  to  avoid  all  sins.' 
And  17th  chap,  of  Enchirid.  he  says :  *  there  are  certain 
things,  which  it  is  more  useful  not  to  know  than  to  know.' 

"  It  is  said,  also,  for  this  time  and  for  this  country;  be- 
cause, where  money  is  more  plenty  or  more  scarce,  a  greater 
or  less  quantity  is  requisite,  and  in  the  time  in  which  money 
was  more  scarce  here,  a  less  quantity  was  sufficient ;  as  iji 
accordance  with  these  things,  the  daily  pay  of  a  labourer  is 
usually  increased  or  diminished." 

Concerning  the  palliations  or  Excuses  of  thefts.   (89.) 

"  There  are  two  principal  claims,  under  which  thefts  are 
wont  to  be  covered ;  namely,  the  claims  of  necessity,  and 
oi  just  compensation.     Hence  it  is  asked  : 

"  Whether  it  is  lawful  to  steal  in  a  case  of  necessity :  or 
rather,  whether  it  is  lawful  to  take  another's  property  on  ac- 
count of  necessity  1 

"  /.  Observe.  It  is  important  to  distinguish  a  threefold 
necessity :  extreme,  in  which  life  is  in  danger :  urgent,  in 
which  health,  or  station  is  endangered ;  and  common,  which 
the  poor  suffer  everywhere. 

"  //.  Ans.  It  is  lawful  to  take  another  man's  property, 
either  secretly  or  openly,  in  so  far  as  there  is  necessity  for 
supplying  extreme  want:  the  reason  is,  because  then  all 
things  are  common. 

"  If  this  was  lawful  in  order  to  supply  my  own  extreme 
necessity,  the  same  will  be  lawful  for  the  necessity  of  my 
neighbour ;  unless  I  can  succour  him  from  my  own  means. 

*'  This  case  alone  is  excepted,  namely,  when  by  taking 
another  man's  property,  the  owner  would  be  also  brought 
into  similar  necessity. 

*'  Is  he  thought  to  be  in  extreme  necessity,  who  by  asking 
or  begging  can  relieve  his  extreme  necessity? 

"  Ans.  No :  for  no  one  is  thought  to  be  in  extreme  neces- 
sity, who  may  relieve  it  by  lawful  means,  nor  should  this 
means  be  called  unbecoming  for  an  honourable  man :  for 
nothing  is  dishonourable  for  necessity.     Besides  such  a  pre- 


CONCERNING  THEFT  AND  RAPINE.  251 

text  would  open  the  door  for  many  thefts  and  for  disturbance 
of  the  state. 

"  Should  those  things  which  are  taken  away  through  ne- 
cessity be  restored  ? 

"  If  the  thing  taken  away  still  remains  after  the  necessity 
is  over,  it  is  doubtless  to  be  restored :  because  extreme  ne- 
cessity does  not  confer  a  right  to  another  man's  property  ex- 
cept in  so  far  as  is  necessary  for  its  relief:  and  hence  if,  in 
order  to  escape  death,  you  have  made  use  of  another  man's 
horse,  you  ought  to  restore  it  when  the  exigency  is  over. 

"  If  the  thing  be  consumed, — for  instance,  wine,  bread, 
<Sz;c.,  he  ought  to  restore  nothing,  even  if  after  suffering  want 
he  should  come  into  better  fortune.  Except  unless  he  has 
goods  elsewhere,  and  thus  may  be  supposed  rather  to  take 
another's  property  by  way  of  borrowing ;  for  then  it  should 
be  restored :  nor  is  such  a  one  properly  in  extreme  necessity, 
but  only  in  respect  to  some  thing. 

"  What  must  be  said  concerning  common  and  urgent  ne- 
cessity ? 

"  It  is  agreed  among  all  that  it  is  not  lawful  to  take  an- 
other's property  on  account  of  common  necessity. 

"  Nor  is  it  lawful  to  take  what  is  another's  on  account  of 
any  pressing  necessity  whatsoever,  distinct  from  extreme ; 
because  goods  do  not  become  common  on  account  of  such 
a  necessity ;  the  reason  is,  because  as  cases  of  urgent  neces- 
sity are  very  common,  disturbance  of  the  state  would  easily 
ensue  if  then  it  were  lawful  to  steal  the  property  of  another. 

"  Hence  this  36th  proposition  was  condemned  by  Innocent 
XI. :  '  It  is  permitted  to  steal  not  only  in  extreme  but  also  in 
urgent  necessity.' 

"  Yet  authors  agree  that  the  sin-  of  him  who  steals  from 
urgent  necessity  is  diminished  so  much  the  more  as  the  ne- 
cessity is  greater. 

"  Ohj.  St.  Thomas  does  not  distinguish  between  extreme 
and  urgent  necessity,  therefore,  &c. 

"  Ans.  I  deny  the  antecedent.  It  is  plain  from  Art.  7,  in 
Corp.,  &c. 

"  Ohj.  II.  The  things  which  some  persons  have  supera- 
bundantly, are  due  by  natural  law  to  the  support  of  the  poor, 
says  St.  Thomas :  but  this  is  true,  not  only  in  extreme,  but 


252  CONCERNING  THEFT  AND  RAPINE. 

also  in  urgent  necessity ;  therefore  poor  people  may  take 
those  things  as  due  to  themselves  in  urgent  necessity. 

"  Ans.  From  this  argument  it  would  follow  that  this  might 
be  lawful  not  only  in  urgent  but  also  in  common  necessity ; 
which  no  one  would  say.  Besides,  when  any  one  is  obliged 
to  give  something  to  another,  the  other  may  not  on  that  ac- 
count steal  it ;  and  especially  here,  when  it  is  not  a  debt  of 
justice,  but  only  of  charity  and  mercy,"  &c.  &c. 

Concerning  Recovery  or  Compensation.     (90.) 

"  What  is  compensation  ? 

*'  Ans.  It  is  called  in  law,  a  mutual  settling  of  debt  and 
credit.  It  may  be  done  in  two  ways,  either  by  retaining  so 
much,  or  by  privately  taking  so  much  from  the  property  of 
a  debtor  as  the  debtor  owes. 

"  How  manifold  is  compensation  ? 

"  Ans.  Twofold  ;  namely,  manifest  and  secret. 

"  What  is  manifest  compensation  ? 

"  Ans.  It  is  a  mutual  settling  of  debt  and  credit  with  a 
Jcnotvledge  of  the  debtor:  for  instance,  John  owes  Peter  100 
for  clothing,  and  Peter  owes  John  100  for  wine;  debt  and 
credit  are  compensated,  and  satisfaction  is  made  to  both. 

"  Is  manifest  compensation  always  lawful  ? 

*'  Ans.  If  the  question  is  asked  concerning  retaining  pro- 
perty due  to  another,  because  another  owes  me  an  equal 
amount,  such  compensation  is  lawful. 

"  It  is  also  lawful  to  recover  one's  property  in  revenge  of 
an  act  of  theft,  or  when  it  is  not  yet  put  away  in  a  safe 
place ;  because  this  has  the  plea  of  just  defence :  and  what 
is  more,  many  authors  say,  that  this  is  lawfully  done  with 
moderate  force,  if  the  thing  to  be  recovered  is  plainly  in 
sight,  and  cannot  otherwise  be  recovered ;  only  let  there  be 
no  scandal  and  other  improprieties. 

"  But  if  a  thing  owned  by  another  is  manifestly  taken,  be- 
cause the  other  owes  that  thing  or  an  equivalent,  such  com- 
pensation is  ordinarily  unlawful ;  because  it  is  contrary  to 
the  order  of  justice,  and  calculated  to  disturb  the  public 
peace. 

"  What  compensation  is  called  secret  ? 

"  Ans.   That  which  is  made  without  the  knowledge  of 


CONCERNING  THEFT  AND  RAPINE.  253 

the  debtor.  But  it  may  be  done  in  a  threefold  manner :  1st. 
By  recovering  one's  property  in  the  whole,  unjustly  kept 
back'  by  another.  2d.  By  privately  stealing  from  the  debtor 
an  equivalent  to  the  amount  due,  if  he  will  not  pay  or  make 
restitution.  3d.  By  secretly  retaining  from  the  goods  of  the 
debtor  so  much  as  he  owes  me. 

"  Is  secret  compensation  lawful  ? 

"  Ans.  St.  Thomas,  Art.  5.  ad.  3.,  says  :  '  But  he  who  by 
stealth  takes  his  own  property,  unjustly  kept  back  by  an- 
other, sins  indeed,  not  because  he  wrongs  him  who  detains 
it,  (and  therefore  he  is  not  obliged  to  make  any  restitution  or 
recompense,)  but  he  sins  against  common  justice,  when  he 
usurps  to  himself  the  judgment  of  his  own  case,  passing  by  the 
established  order  of  law.  And  therefore  he  is  bound  to  make 
satisfaction  to  God,  and  to  take  care  that  the  scandal  among 
his  neighbours,  if  any  should  thence  arise,  may  be  allayed.' 

"  Hence  Steyaert  maintains  that  it  is  always  unlawful,  in 
Appendix,  Controv.  4,  &c. 

"  Besides,  although  the  offence  against  the  common  law 
might  sometimes  be  only  a  venial  sin,  yet  other  serious  dis- 
orders are  liable  to  follow,  as  scandal,  infamy,  risk  of  dou- 
ble payment,  danger  of  frequent  abuse  against  the  common 
good,  &c. ;  hence  most  authors,  even  those  who  defend  it  as 
lawful,  say  that  it  is  dangerous  in  practice ;  and  therefore, 
generally,  the  contrary  is  to  be  recommended. 

"  Yet  Sylvius,  Wiggers,  de  Cocq,  Billuart,  Collet,  &c., 
teach  that  it  may  be  lawful  through  circumstances,  the  fol- 
lowing conditions  being  laid  down  : 

"  1.  That  the  debt  is  certain  and  apparent,  or  that  it  is 
certainly  agreed  that  the  property  is  yours.  Also,  that  it  is 
due  from  justice,  not  from  charity  or  any  other  virtue. 

"  2.  That  it  cannot  be  recovered  by  any  other  method ; 
for  instance,  by  way  of  the  law,  except  with  great  difficulty 
and  inconvenience. 

"  3.  That  there  is  no  danger  of  scandal  and  infamy :  lest, 
for  instance,  he  may  be  regarded  as  a  thief  by  recovering  in 
this  way. 

"  4.  That  care  must  be  taken  lest  the  debtor  in  this  way, 
should  pay  or  restore  twice. 

"  5.  That  a  thing  is  taken  the  same  in  kind  if  it  can  be 


254  CONCERNING  THEFT  AND  RAPINE. 

done,  and  that  no  injury  is  done  to  a  third  person  by  taking 
his  property  ;  for  instance,  if  lent  to  the  debtor. 

"  6.  That  compensation  be  not  made  from  the  property  of 
a  debtor  deposited  with  a  creditor,  or  from  something  lent : 
for  this  the  laws  forbid  (Chap.  Good  faith  respecting  De- 
posit) :  nor  can  this  compensation  be  made  from  property 
due  to  the  stale  or  governor :  v.  g.,  from  tolls ;  thus  also,  he 
who  has  been  condemned  to  give  money  or  anything  else, 
cannot  use  compensation. 

"  7.  In  order  to  avoid  the  difficulty  of  objections,  Billuart 
adds,  that  it  is  requisite  that  all  these  things  are  ascertained, 
not  by  the  private  judgment  of  the  person  taking  compensa- 
tion, but  in  the  opinion  of  some  prudent  man :  lest  iniquity 
should  lie  to  itself. 

"  But  so  many  conditions  and  cautions,  which  can  scarcely 
ever  all  be  afforded,  justly  argue  the  weakness  of  this  opinion : 
besides,  the  reason  of  St.  Thomas  always  militates  against 
it,  that  the  person  compensating  himself  sins  against  common 
justice,  when  he  usurps  to  himself  the  judgment  of  his  own 
case,  neglecting  the  established  order  of  the  law. 

"  Whatever  this  may  be,  it  is  certain,  however,  that  ser- 
vants, although  in  fact  they  might  receive  less  pay  than  the 
labour  which  they  undergo  is  worth,  yet  may  not  on  that 
account  avail  themselves  of  secret  compensation ;  as  is  plain 
from  this  37th  proposition,  condemned  by  Innocent  XI. ;  '  ser- 
vants and  house-girls  may  secretly  steal  from  their  masters 
for  the  compensation  of  their  labour,  which  they  deem 
greater  than  the  salary  which  they  receive;'  and  authors 
extend  this  even  to  the  case  in  which  a  servant  has  been 
compelled  by  poverty,  &c.,  to  serve  for  too  little  wages." 

Concerning  Small  Thefts,  (91.) 

"  It  has  been  said.  No.  88,  that  theft  from  its  very  nature 
is  a  mortal  sin :  yet  it  may  be  venial  from  the  imperfect  de- 
liberation of  the  act,  and  the  triflmg  value  of  the  matter. 

"  Is  theft  always  venial,  when  the  matter  which  is  taken 
away  is  trifling  ? 

*'  Ans.  No :  for  it  may  become  mortal  in  seven  ways, 
just  as  any  sin  whatever,  venial  on  account  of  the  smallness 
of  the  matter,  can  become  mortal ;  as  may  be  seen,  from 
No.  165,  &c. 


'        CONCERNING  THEFT  AND  RAPINE.  255 

"  Yet  a  theft,  trifling  as  to  matter,  becomes  mortal,  prin- 
cipally in  the  three  following  ways  : 

"1.  He  sins  mortally,  who  takes  away  a  trifling  matter, 
having  the  will,  desire,  or  intention  of  taking  away  a  valu- 
able article,  if  opportunity  were  afforded. 

"  2.  Any  one  sins  mortally  as  often  as  he  takes  away  a 
thing  of  little  value,  intending  by  many  small  thefts  to  reach 
a  considerable  sum,  thus,  v.  g.  he  who  from  an  intention  of 
stealing  5  florins  should  have  taken  away  at  each  time  one 
farthing,  would  have  committed  up  to  that  time  100  mortal 
sins :  the  reason  is,  because  each  theft  proceeds  from  a  bad 
intention. 

"  Daelman  with  some  others  maintains  that  many  such 
thefts  continually  committed  constitute  one  mortal  theft,  be- 
cause they  flow  from  one  and  the  same  prevailing,  uninter- 
rupted intention ;  but  practically  the  thing  amounts  to  the 
same,  because  this  one  is  equivalent  to  many. 

"  3.  Although  any  one  should  not  have  the  intention 
either  of  taking  away  anything  valuable,  nor  yet  intend  by 
small  amounts  to  reach  a  considerable  sum,  yet  he  who  often 
steals  small  amounts  from  one  or  even  from  different  per- 
sons, sins  mortally  from  the  very  circumstance  that  he 
makes  up  the  same,  perceiving,  or  being  able  and  in  duty 
bound  to  perceive,  that  it  would  reach  a  considerable 
amount.  And  hence  the  previous  acts  will  be  venial  sins 
from  the  trifling  value  of  the  matter ;  but  the  act  by  which 
the  amount  is  completed,  sufficient  for  a  mortal  sin,  will  be 
mortal :  because  this  last  act  is  regarded  as  pertaining  to  an 
important  amount,  for  the  reason  that  the  previous  amounts 
coalesce  with  the  last ;  and  thus  by  willing  the  last,  he  by 
inference  wills  the  former  amounts. 

"  For  the  same  reason,  it  must  be  said,  that  if,  v.  g.  a 
person  by  the  ninth  trifling  theft  shall  have  completed  an  im- 
portant amount,  he  will  have  sinned  mortally,  and  he  again 
sins  mortally  by  adding  the  tenth  trifling  theft,  and  so  of  the 
rest,  &c. 

"  In  relation  to  this  subject,  this  38th  proposition  has  been 
condemned  by  Innocent  XI.  '  A  person  is  not  bound  under 
pain  of  mortal  sin  to  restore  what  has  been  taken  away  by 
small  thefts,  however  great  the  sum  may  be.' 

"From  what  has  been  said,  you  will  infer,  that  innkeep- 


256  CONCERNING  THEFT  AND  RAPINE. 

ers,  merchants,  or  those  who  keep  a  shop,  who  defraud  in 
number,  weight,  or  measure,  even  if  at,each  time,  they  may- 
intend  to  steal  only  something  trifling,  yet  at  each  time  sin 
mortally,  because  their  intention  is  by  such  frauds  to  reach 
a  considerable  sum.  Even  if  from  the  beginning  they  may 
not  have  had  this  intention,  they  still  sin  mortally  every 
time  after  they  have  completed  an  important  amount. 

"  Many  authors  say  that  a  greater  quantity  of  matter  is 
requisite  in  order  to  be  mortal,  when  things  are  taken  away 
by  small  thefts  from  different  persons,  or  from  the  same  per- 
son at  different  times :  but  Braunman  rejects  this  as  perni- 
cious in  practice :  because,  in  order  to  be  mortal,  a  considera- 
ble absolute  quantity  of  loss,  or  of  another's  property  which 
is  unjustly  detained,  is  sufficient. 

"  When  each  one  of  several  persons  causes  a  loss  to  the 
same  person,  which,  when  taken  together,  is  serious,  do  the 
amounts  coalesce  1 

"  Ans.  No  :  unless  they  mutually  co-operate.  See  Dael- 
man,  &c. 

"  Is  he  who  takes  a  considerable  sum  by  small  thefts,  bound 
under  mortal  sin  to  restore  the  whole  ? 

"  Ans.  No :  but  in  order  to  be  free  from  the  mor- 
tal SIN  OF  unjust  detention,  IT  IS  SUFFICIENT  TO  MAKE 
RESTITUTION  SO  FAR  THAT  WHAT  HE  RETAINS  MAY  NO 
LONGER  BE  A  SERIOUS  AMOUNT. 

"  Yet  authors  remark  that  this  is  dangerous  in  practice : 
and  hence  confessors,  in  regard  to  all  thieves,  should  be  in- 
exorable, and  oblige  the  penitents  to  the  restitution  of  all,  even 
the  minutest  thefts ;  in  order  that  thus  they  may  more  effi- 
caciously be  deterred  from  greater. 

"  How  to  proceed  practically  with  him,  who  confesses  that 
he  has  stolen,  may  be  seen  in  Schema  7,  in  the  volume  con- 
cerning Penance." 

Concerning  the  thefts  of  certain  persons  in  particular. 
(92.) 

"What  is  to  be  thought  concerning  thefts  of  children  from 
the  property  of  their  parents  ? 

"  If  the  son  steals  a  considerable  amount  from  parents 
who  are  seriously  unwilling,  it  is  certain  that  he  sins  mor- 
tally. 


CONCERNING  THEFT  AND  RAPINE.  257 

"  It  is  said,  a  considerahle  amount :  because  all  admit 
that  the  quantity  of  the  matter  should  be  greater  in  this  case 
to  constitute  a  mortal  sin,  that  when  something  is  taken  away 
from  strangers :  the  reason  of  which  is,  that  children  have  a 
certain  remote  right  to  the  property  of  parents,  which  after 
death  ought  to  devolve  to  themselves :  also,  because  parents 
are  usually  not  so  unwilling. 

"  It  is  said,  from  parents  who  are  seriously  unwilling: 
with  respect  to  which  it  must  be  observed,  that  they  either 
are  unwilling  only  as  to  the  manner  of  stealing  it,  or  that 
they  are  unwilling  also  as  to  the  amount  taken  away. 

"  If  they  are  unwilling  only  as  to  the  manner,  it  is  usually 
admitted  that  a  greater  quantity  is  required  in  order  to  the 
commission  of  mortal  sin  in  respect  to  the  amount,  than  when 
they  are  unwilling  as  to  the  value :  it  is  also  admitted  that  if 
the  manner  only  is  displeasing,  not  the  act  itself,  there  arises 
no  necessity  for  restitution. 

"  But  when  parents  are  at  the  same  time  unwilling  as  re- 
gards the  value,  and  the  quantity  is  pretty  considerable,  chil- 
dren are  not  to  be  excused  from  mortal  sin,  nor  from  the 
obligation  of  making  restitution. 

"  With  respect  to  such  cases,  the  condition  of  the  pf./ents 
should  be  considered,  whether  they  are  wealthy,  or  whether 
they  are  in  straitened  circumstances,  &c.  :  also,  the  age  of 
the  children,  and  the  purpose  for  which  they  consu.ne  what 
they  have  stolen :  the  custom  of  the  place  is  also  to  be  re- 
garded, or  what  parents  of  such  a  condition  may  be  accus- 
tomed to  concede  to  their  children  in  such  a  yjlacj. 

"  The  method  which  a  child  takes  in  stealirig,  is  also  to 
be  principally  considered  :  whether,  v.  g.,  by  breaking  open 
chests,  by  collecting  debts  in  the  name  of  parents  under  a 
false  seal,  for  instance,  by  receiving  the  returns  of  revenues 
due  to  parents,  &c. 

"  Practically,  for  the  most  part,  they  ought  to  be  obliged 
to  make  some  restitution,  or  to  ask  pardon,  although  the 
parents  might  be  unwilling  only  as  to  the  mode :  because 
this  is  the  best  remedy  against  a  relapse. 

"  If  a  son  is  under  obligation  to  restore  something  consi- 
derable to  his  parents,  and  is  not  able,  then  he  is  to  be  com- 
pelled to  permit  so  much  to  be  subtracted  from  his  portion  in 
22 


258  CONCERNING  THEFT  AND  RAPINE. 

the  division  of  the  inheritance :  unless  the  parents  should  in 
a  valid  manner  remit  the  restitution. 

"  May  a  husband  commit  theft  upon  a  wife,  and  vice  versa, 
a  wife  upon  a  husband? 

"  Ans,  Yes :  he,  if  against  the  consent  of  his  wife,  he 
squanders  property,  the  control  of  which  belongs  to  her : 
such  as  dowry,  &c. :  but  the  wife,  in  more  instances  commits 
theft,  by  taking,  secretly,  and  without  the  consent  of  her  hus- 
band, their  common  property.  Yet  it  ought  to  be  understood 
what  things  are  permitted  to  wives,  according  to  the  custom 
of  the  place  ;  for  instance,  in  order  to  give  alms,  to  help  poor 
relations,  for  decent  ornament,  &c. 

"  Even  parents  themselves  sometimes  commit  theft  upon 
their  children,  by  stealing  from  the  military  property,  whose 
control  and  administration  belongs  to  the  children. 

"  Servants  and  maids,  very  often  sin  by  theft,  when,  for 
instance,  they  avail  themselves  of  secret  compensation,  as 
was  said  No.  90  :  also,  if  they  do  not  perform  the  work  which 
is  due ;  which  ought  also  to  be  taken  into  consideration  with 
regard  to  other  labourers. 

"  Besides,  they  sin  by  theft,  in  proportion  to  the  value  of 
the  thing,  when  they  convert  to  their  own  use,  costly  articles 
of  food  and  drink,  or  things  which  are  usually  denied  to 
them  :  unless  the  consent  of  the  master  can  be  presumed,  at 
least  as  regards  the  amount  taken  away  ;  for  instance,  if  the 
master,  knowing  it,  does  not  say  anything  to  the  contrary,  or 
readily  grants  permission,  when  asked,  &c. 

*'  However,  masters  are  usually  extremely  unwilling  that 
servants  should  steal  such  things  in  order  to  give  or  sell  to 
strangers:  authors  likewise  are  of  opinion  that  they  sin 
grievously,  if,  without  the  consent  of  their  masters,  they  give 
to  the  poor,  goods  to  a  considerable  amount. 

"  An  aggravating  circumstance  in  this  matter  is,  if  ser- 
vants carry  off"  a  thing  committed  to  their  care. 

"  What  is  to  be  thought  concerning  thefts,  which  servants 
commit  in  feeding  cattle ;  for  instance,  by  giving  them  more 
than  the  master  wished,  or  those  things,  which  he  has  for- 
bidden them  to  give  ? 

"  Ans.  These  are  sins  and  common  enough  :  and  if  from 
this  cause  a  considerable  loss  should  accrue  in  the  household 
affairs,  it  is  a  mortal  sin,  and  restitution  i^s  a  duty. 


CONCERNING  THEFT  AND  RAPINE.  259 

"  But  if  the  cattle  are  so  much  improved,  that  the  loss  is 
as  it  were  compensated,  they  will  not  be  obliged  to  make 
restitution,  nor  will  they  so  easily  sin  mortally. 

"  Persons  attached  to  religious  orders,  in  this  respect  are 
nearly  similar  to  the  children  of  a  family,  so  that  they  com- 
mit thefi:  if  they  dispose  of  anything  against  the  consent  of 
the  superiors :  but  besides  they  sin  by  the  offence  of  sacri- 
lege against  the  vow  of  poverty. 

"  The  universal  admonition  of  authors  is  that  in  such 
thefts  there  should  be  no  dissembling,  lest  they  should  be 
multiplied;  although  it  might  be  evident  that  the  owners 
were  unwilling  only  as  to  the  mode  of  taking;  but  that 
some  restitution  is  always  to  be  enjoined,  or  asking  pardon, 
or  that  they  make  amends  for  what  has  been  done  amiss  by 
more  diligent  care  and  labour." 

It  need  scarcely  be  said  that  the  preceding  sections  con- 
tain principles,  which  must  inevitably  lead  to  licentiousness 
and  dishonesty.  The  theology  of  the  Romish  Church 
teaches  that  the  theft  of  an  article  of  small  value  is  a  venial 
offence ;  and  farther,  that  if  the  person  who  is  robbed  is  not 
very  unwilling  to  be  defrauded,  the  sin  is  but  a  little  one. 
Is  this  the  morality  of  the  Bible?  Does  Jesus  Christ  teach 
such  doctrine  as  this  ?  No ;  but  he  says,  "  He  that  is  un- 
just in  the  least,  is  unjust  also  in  much.''''  It  stands  to  rea- 
son that  the  man  who  will  violate  the  dictates  of  his  con- 
science for  a  small  inducement  will  feel  very  little  scruple 
about  transgressing  the  law  of  God  when  the  incentive  is 
greater.  If  he  pleads  in  extenuation  of  his  guilt  that  he  has 
yielded  to  a  small  temptation,  and  that  he  has  stolen  an 
article  of  but  little  value,  who  that  is  possessed  of  common 
sense  would  trust  him  in  a  matter  which  presents  strong  in- 
ducements to  dishonesty  ?  If  he  could  not  resist  the  former, 
how  is  he  to  overcome  the  latter  ?  The  very  weakness  of  the 
temptation  aggravates  his  guilt.  The  Romish  Church  weighs 
guilt  not  by  the  balance  of  the  gospel,  but  in  scales  of  her 
own  invention,  and  her  false  weights  are  an  abomination  to 


260  CONCERNING  THEFT  AND  RAPINE. 

the  Lord  !  What  can  be  more  execrable  than  the  principle 
that  the  guilt  of  an  offender  is  to  be  ascertained  from  the 
feelings,  with  which  the  injured  person  resents  the  trespass 
committed  against  him  1  If  the  individual  defrauded  is  a 
benevolent  and  merciful  man,  and  is  grieved  more  on  ac- 
count of  the  manner  than  the  amount  of  the  injury,  then 
the  offence  is  venial !  But  if  he  is  a  churlish  Nabal,  a  very 
son  of  Belial,  whose  God  is  his  belly,  then  the  guilt  of  the 
offender  is  greatly  aggravated  !  Was  there  ever  a  more  pre- 
posterous doctrine  palmed  upon  the  simplicity  of  foolish  men 
by  the  arch-deceiver  of  souls? 

Every  instance  of  theft,  no  matter  how  small  soever  the 
amount  may  be,  is  an  offence  committed,  not  only,  nor  even 
principally  against  man,  but  against  that  God  who  has  said, 
"  Thou  shalt  not  steal."  The  claims  of  God's  law  are  al- 
most entirely  overlooked  in  Peter  Dens'  casuistry ;  the  guilt 
of  the  transgressor  is  enhanced  or  mitigated  by  considera- 
tions drawn  almost  exclusively  from  human  conceptions  of 
justice;  and  every  honest  man  must  admit  that  our  author's 
deductions  are  not  very  honourable  either  to  himself  or  to 
the  pious  fraternity,  who  are  trained  under  his  tuition ! 

But  I  must  call  the  attention  of  my  reader  to  the  transla- 
tion furnished  in  the  Doway  Bible  of  Prov.  vi.  30.  "  The 
fault  is  not  so  great,  when  a  man  hath  stolen,  for  he  stealeth 
to  fill  his  hungry  soul."  The  translation  in  the  Protestant 
Bible  reads  thus :  "  Men  do  not  despise  a  thief,  if  he  steal 
to  satisfy  his  soul,  when  he  is  hungry."  In  the  Greek 
Septuagint  it  is  'Ou  ^au/xajov  iav  aXw  ris  xXsVtwv,  xXeVtsj 
yot^  I'va  i^'ff\7}(Syi  r'^v  '^v)(rjv  crsjvwv ;  literally,  "  It  is  not  won- 
derful if  one  is  caught  stealing,  for  he  steals  in  order  that  he 
may  fill  his  soul  being  hungry."  This  differs  somewhat 
from  the  Doway  text,  "  The  fault  is  not  so  great  when  a 
man  hath  stolen  ;  for  he  stealeth  to  fill  his  hungry  soul."  In 
the  original,  the  degree  of  the  guilt  of  theft  is  not  the  ques- 
tion, but  the  strength  of  the  peculiar  temptation  ;  and  hence 


CONCERNING  THEFT  AND  RAFINE.  2G1 

the  Doway  text  is  rather  objectionable ;  and  as  for  the  com- 
ment of  tlie  divine  St.  Thomas  "  that  the  necessity  inducing 
to  theft  diminishes^  or  totally  removes  the  fault,"  it 
is  ahogether  Romish.  Solomon  is  comparing  the  temptation 
to  which  the  starving  man  is  exposed  with  that  to  which  he 
yields  who  commits  adultery.  Even  when  the  theft  is  com- 
mitted in  order  to  satisfy  the  cravings  of  hunger,  the  guilt 
remains ;  hence  it  is  said  in  the  very  next  verse  that  the  of- 
fender shall  restore  seven-fold ;  he  shall  give  all  the  sub- 
stance of  his  house,  (ver.  31.)  Solomon  seems  to  have  been 
ignorant  of  the  doctrine  that  in  extreme  necessity  all  things 
ARE  COMMON.  Though  a  man  is  starving,  he  has  no  right 
to  steal — he  had  better  die  than  disobey  the  law  of  God. 
Let  him  use  the  lawful  means,  which  God  has  put  within  his 
reach  ;  and  he  who  feeds  the  ravens,  and  hunts  for  the  young 
lion,  will  never  suffer  the  righteous  to  perish  with  hunger. 
"  Seek  ye  first  the  kingdom  of  God  and  his  righteousness, 
and  all  these  things  shall  be  added  unto  you."  The  object 
of  insisting  upon  the  above  translation,  probably  is  to  glean  a 
little  more  argument  for  the  propriety  of  the  Romish  distinc- 
tion between  mortal  and  venial  sin. 

The  attempt  to  establish  the  amount  necessary  to  consti- 
tute theft  a  mortal  offence,  and  all  the  reasoning  in  relation 
to  that  point,  are  ineffably  ridiculous !  "  The  daily  wages 
of  a  man  labouring  in  some  honourable  trade  is  sufficient." 
Supposing  then  that  three  or  four  shillings,  the  amount  spe- 
cified by  this  discriminating  divine,  are  equivalent  to  one  dol- 
lar of  our  money,  then  the  thief  who  purloins  99f  cents 
commits  a  venial  offence;  but  he  who  takes  a  quarter  of  a 
cent  more,  and  thus  completes  the  dollar,  is  guilty  of  mortal 
sin  ! !     Oh  !  tempora  !  oh  !  mores  ! 

Then,  too,  the  cases  in  which  restitution  is  to  be  made  are 

peculiar.     If  a  man  in  extreme  necessity  has  stolen  "  wine, 

bread,  &c.,  he  ought  to  restore  nothing,  even  if,  after  suffering 

want,  he  should  come  into  better  fortune  !"  The  old  law  was, 

22  * 


I" 


262  OF  SUICIDE. 

that  when  a  man  stole,  even  "  to  satisfy  his  hungry  soul,"  "  he 
shall  restore  seven-fold ;  he  shall  give  all  the  substance  of 
his  house ;"  but  of  course  the  law  of  the  Bible  has  nothing 
to  do  with  the  Popish  code  of  morals. 

Again :  He  who  takes  a  considerable  sum  by  small  thefts 
is  bound  to  restore  only  so  much,  that  the  amount  which  he 
retains  may  no  longer  be  serious ! !  And  although  a  kind 
of  caveat  is  inserted  that  this  is  dangerous  in  practice,  ac- 
cording to  some  authors,  and  that  penitents  should  be  obliged 
to  make  restitution,  even  of  the  smallest  thefts ;  yet  this  is 
enjoined  only  on  the  ground  of  expediency^  not  because  it  is 
an  absolute  obligation ! 

The  sum  and  substance  of  the  whole  chapter  is  briefly 
this,  that  if  Protestant  parents  wish  to  have  their  children 
effectually  trained  up  as  candidates  for  the  penitentiary,  we 
recommend  to  them  the  schools  in  which  the  morals  of  Peter 
Dens  are  inculcated. 


CHAPTER  XXVI. 

The  sections  which  treat  of  injuries  committed  against 
the  good  name  of  another,  and  of  the  restitution  which  is 
due  in  such  cases,  I  shall  omit.    The  119th  sect,  treats 

Of  injuries  against  the  body  of  a  neighbour. 

OF   SUICIDE. 

"  There  are  various  means  by  which  injury  is  inflicted  on 
the  body  of  a  neighbour ;  namely,  suicide,  homicide,  muti- 
lation, adultery,  incest,  fornication,  rape,  and  the  things  which 
are  included  in  these,  as  duelling,  abortion,  whipping,  im- 
prisonment, &c.,  which  are  forbidden  respectively  by  the 
fifth  (i.  e.,  the  sixth)  commandment  of  the  Decalogue: 
'  Thou  shall  not  kill ;'  or  by  the  sixth,  (seventh,)  '  Thou  shall 
not  commit  adultery.' 


OF  SUICIDE.  263 

"  What  is  suicide  ? 

"  Suicide  i's,  ivhen  any  one  withovt  the  command  or  per- 
mission of  the  divine  authority  inflicts  death  upon  himself. 

"Is  it  lawful  to  kill  one's  self? 

"  Ans.  To  kill  one's  self  directly  and  intentionally,  with- 
out divine  authority,  is  a  most  grievous  sin. 

"It  is  proved,  1.  from  the  command,  *  Thou  shalt  not 
kill ;'  for  if  it  is  not  permitted  by  the  force  of  this  command- 
ment to  kill  a  neighbour,  much  less  one's  self;  as  every  one 
is  nearest  to  himself. 

"  2.  To  kill  one's  self  is  contrary  to  the  inclination  of 
nature ;  because  every  thing  preserves  and  guards  itself 
against  harm ;  but  no  exception  against  this  inclination 
ought  to  be  admitted,  unless  it  is  clear  that  it  has  been  made 
by  the  author  of  nature. 

"  The  suicide  therefore  sins  against  God,  who  has  reserved 
to  himself  the  power  of  life  and  death  ;  he.  sins  also  against 
the  state,  a  member  of  which  he  takes  away  without  her 
consent :  and  against  himself  by  violating  the  law  of  pre- 
serving his  own  life,  which  was  granted  to  him  by  God 
never  to  be  abrogated ;  also,  by  offending  against  charity, 
by  which  every  one  is  bound  to  love  himself. 

"  St.  Jerome,  writing  on  Jonas,  Ch.  i.,  seems  to  teach  that 
it  is  lawful  to  kill  one's  self  for  the  preservatior;  of  chastity  : 
but  in  this  point  we  must,  with  St.  Augustine  and  St.  Thomas, 
differ  from  him,  &c. 

"  As  for  the  Holy  Virgins,  who  are  said  to  have  killed 
themselves  lest  they  should  be  violated,  it  must  be  said,  with 
St.  Augustine,  that  they  did  it  by  the  direction  of  the 
Holy  Spirit.  Some  excuse  them  by  reason  of  ignorance, 
which,  in  regard  to  them,  could  be  at  least  not  very  criminal. 

"  As  to  the  direction  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  or  divine  authority 
to  kill  one's  self  or  others,  Peter  Marchantius  correctly  ad- 
monishes that  it  cannot  be  presumed,  but  ought  to  be  most 
clearly  evident ;  because,  in  such  cases,  fraud  and  illusion 
of  the  devil  may  easily  intervene. 

"  From  these  remarks  it  is  plain,  that  acts  in  themselves 
fatal,  are  never  lawful  against  one's  self,  those  which  in 
themselves  and  their  own  nature  tend  to  death :  as  cutting 
the  throat,  strangling,  taking  poison,  &c. 


264  OF  SUICIDE. 

'*  Can  a  judge  who  is  guilty  of  death  lawfully  kill  himself, 
as  he  can  kill  others? 

"  Ans.  No ;  because  that  judge  is  not  a  judge  of  himself, 
but  must  be  judged  by  others. 

"  Can  a  judge  condemn  any  criminal  to  kill  himself? 

"  Ans.  The  negative  answer  seems  proper :  because  such 
power  is  not  necessary  to  the  state,  as  other  modes  of 
punishing  criminals  are  supplied :  nor  is  it  clear  that  God 
has  granted  this  power  to  the  state. 

"  Hence  authors  teach  that  a  person  condemned  to  die  of 
hunger,  cannot  abstain  from  food  secretly  offered,  nor  take 
the  poison  which  he  might  be  condemned  to  take. 

"  Is  it  lawful  to  leap  into  a  river,  in  which  a  man  must 
certainly  be  drowned,  in  order  to  baptize  an  infant,  which 
would  otherwise  die  without  baptism  ? 

"Ans.  No:  because  the  immediate  effect  ofsuch  a  leap  would 
be  his  own  death  ;  and  the  baptism  of  the  child  by  no  means 
follows  from  this,  but  only  from  the  application  of  the  matter 
and  form.  We  are  indeed  bound,  in  order  to  succour  such 
a  child  to  expose  ourselves  to  risk  of  death  ;  but  it  is  one 
thing  to  expose  one's  self  to  the  danger  of  death,  and  another 
to  kill  one's  self. 

"  Is  it  lawful  to  leap  from  a  tower  on  fire,  in  order  to 
avoid  the  severer  pains  of  burning,  when  in  either  case  there 
is  no  hope  of  escaping  death  ? 

"  Ans.  Yes,  probably :  at  least  then,  if  by  leaping  from 
the  tower  he  does  not  accelerate  his  death ;  the  reason  is, 
because  that  leap  is  immediately  an  escape  of  a  greater  evil, 
namely,  a  more  painful  death ;  and  hence  it  seems  that  per- 
missively  he  may  have  recourse  to  the  less  painful  death 
which  follows  from  it." 

Whenever  any  of  the  traditions  or  doctrines  of  Holy 
Church  are  contradicted  by  the  moral  law,  or  are  plainly 
at  variance  with  opinions  now  generally  received,  an  expla- 
nation is  always  at  hand.  If  the  saintship  of  any  of  the 
gods  or  goddesses  of  Rome  is  rendered  problematical  by  the 
manner  of  their  lives  or  their  death,  some  Father  is  prepared 
with  a  pious  suggestion,  and  this  is  at  once  received  as  per- 
fectly satisfactory ;  v.  g.,  the  Holy  Virgins  who  committed 


OF  SUICIDE.  265 

suicide,  and  who  are  invoked  with  great  fervour  by  their  ad- 
mirers, killed  themselves  by  the  direction  of  the  Holy 
Spirit.  Thus  God  is  made  to  suspend  the  operation  even 
of  his  moral  law  in  order  to  preserve  the  idols  of  Rome 
from  suspicion !  If  this  is  not  blasphemous  presumption, 
what  crime  is  there  which  deserves  the  name? 

Of  all  the  cases  of  conscience  that  ever  tormented  a 
casuist,  surely  there  are  few  so  perplexing  as  that  which  is 
proposed  towards  the  close  of  the  last  section,  relative  to  the 
immersion  of  an  infant  which  is  in  danger  of  dying  without 
baptism ! 

Of  Indirect  Suicide.    (120.) 

*'  Is  it  lawful  to  kill  one's  self  indirectly,  or  to  do  or  ne- 
glect any  thing  from  which,  though  not  intended,  death  may 
follow  1 

"  Ans.  In  itself  considered,  no :  because  death  would  thus 
certainly  be  voluntary  in  the  cause,  or  might  be  so  construed  ; 
and  therefore  it  is  sinful,  unless  a  sufficient  reason  for  so 
doing  is  afforded. 

"Therefore,  they  are  guilty  of  suicide,  1.  who,  for  trifling 
reasons,  expose  themselves  to  danger  of  death :  as,  for  in- 
stance, fool-hardy  rope-dancers,  or  such  as  take  poisons  for 
the  sake  of  vain-glory,  unless  they  know  how  to  meet  the 
danger  by  means  of  an  antidote,  so  that  it  may  be  morally 
removed. 

"  2.  They  who  accelerate  death  by  surfeit,  drunkenness, 
drinking  heated  wine,  immoderate  passions,  &c. 

"  3.  Sick  persons  refusing  ordinary  remedies,  which  would 
probably  be  an  advantage,  and  would  not  do  any  harm,  if 
there  is  danger  of  death  from  their  neglect. 

"It  is  to  be  observed  that  the  abovementioned  persons  sin 
so  much  the  more  as  they  accelerate  death,  and  so  long  as 
they  are  in  this  state  of  grievously  injuring  themselves,  so 
long  are  they  in  constant  mortahsin,  and  unworthy  of  abso- 
lution. 

"  Do  they  sin,  who  shorten  their  days  through  austerities? 

"  Ans.  It  is  a  rare  thing  that  days  are  shortened  by 
moderate  austerity  of  life,  but  life  is  rather  prolonged.     Be- 


266  OF  SUICIDE. 

sides,  although  certain  austerities  might  abbreviate  life  some- 
what, yet  if  they  are  moderate  they  are  lawful :  because  the 
subjection  of  the  flesh,  and  the  manifold  spiritual  advantage, 
which  immediately  accrue  from  it,  overcome  this  bad  effect ; 
this,  also,  the  common  experience  of  the  Saints  proves. 

"  Yet  immoderate  austerities  are  unlawful  as  fatal  to  a 
person.  Nor  is  there  ever  any  need  of  them  for  primary 
purposes.  But  those  are  regarded  as  immoderate  under 
which  nature  cannot  be  sustained,  or  a  person  is  rendered 
unable  properly  to  perform  his  duties :  and  so  far  are  they 
from  producing  the  effect  that  by  them  the  body  is  subjected 
to  the  Spirit,  that  it  is  rather  hindered  from  obeying  the  Spirit 
on  account  of  languor. 

"  It  is  to  be  observed,  1st.  from  the  Saints,  Philip  Nerius, 
and  Francis  Sales,  that  they  are  to  be  more  highly  esteemed, 
who,  mortifying  the  flesh  with  the  moderation  of  reason,  are 
wholly  devoted  to  correcting  the  understanding,  and  subject- 
ing and  conforming  their  own  will  to  the  divine,  than  they, 
who  neglecting  the  care  of  the  mind  wish  to  afflict  the  body 
alone. 

"  2d.  That  in  undergoing  austerities,  every  one  depends 
upon  the  suggestion  and  direction  of  his  own  confessor,  not- 
withstanding any  private  imagination  and  will. 

"  It  was  said  at  the  commencement  of  this  number,  unless 
a  sufficient  reason  for  so  doing  is  afforded  ;  and  hence  a 
pastor  administering  the  Sacraments  to  persons  infected  with 
the  plague  with'  the  risk  of  contagion,  the  soldier  continuing 
in  his  station  at  the  peril  of  his  life  for  the  common  good, 
&c.,  are  not  to  be  blamed,  but  very  greatly  commended. 

"  For  a  similar  reason,  the  soldier  does  not  sin,  who  first 
ascends  the  wall,  and  sets  fire  to  a  train  of  powder  in  order 
to  overthrow  a  tower,  although  he  sees  that  he  will  certainly 
be  killed  in  consequence. 

"  He  also  appears  probably  excusable,  who  being  placed 
on  an  enemy's  ship  sets  fire  to  a  train  of  powder  in  order 
that  the  ship  and  the  enemy  may  perish,  even  with  his  own 
certain  destruction,  if  the  liberty  of  his  country  may  accrue 
from  it ;  the  case  is  otherwise,  if  it  would  not  ensue,  for  this 
reason,  for  instance,  that  many  other  ships  of  the  enemy 
might  still  remain. 

"  Yet  that  soldier  would  be  culpable,  who  should  do  the 


OF  SUICIDE.  267 

same  remaining  in  his  own  ship,  in  order  that  he  himself 
with  the  ship  may  not  come  into  the  power  of  the  enemy, 
&c. 

"  May  or  ought  a  person  about  to  be  condemned,  or 
already  condemned,  flee  from  prison  if  he  can  do  it  without 
violence  ? 

"  If  he  should  be  innocent,  he  would  properly  be  bound  to 
make  his  escape  :  unless  the  good  of  the  state  or  of  religion 
should  otherwise  advise :  thus  many  martyrs,  although  they 
could  escape,  remained  in  prison. 

"  But  if  he  is  guilty,  it  is  commonly  taught,  that  such  a 
one  may  flee,  but  yet  that  he  is  not  obliged  to  escape :  that 
he  is  not  obliged  to  flee,  is  proved  from  this,  that  death  would 
not  ensue  from  his  failing  to  escape,  but  from  the  crime  which 
he  has  committed :  yea,  more,  it  is  believed  that  a  criminal 
may,  of  his  own  accord,  give  himself  up  to  the  judge,  that  he 
may  make  satisfaction  to  God  and  the  republic. 

"  That  he  may  escape,  is  proved  from  this,  that  flight  is 
the  means  of  preserving  life  :  but  he  would  too  much  repugn 
his  natural  inclination,  if  it  were  not  lawful  to  avail  himself 
of  such  means :  and  hence  some  believe  that  to  this  end,  he 
may  even  break  from  jail  and  confinement. 

"  He  is  not  considered  a  suicide  who  permits  himself  to  be 
killed,  because  he  cannot  preserve  his  life,  except  by  extra- 
ordinary means;  for  instance,  by  the  most  costly  medicines, 
the  severest  pains,  &c. :  thus,  also,  a  monk  is  not  obliged  to 
go  out  of  the  cloister,  that  he  may  get  a  change  of  air,  for 
the  sake  of  obtaining  health. 

"  Whether  a  Carthusian  is  obliged,  at  the  risk  of  life, 
to  abstain  from  eating  meats,  see  resolved.  No.  46,  concern- 
ing the  Laws,  &c." 

I  will  here  insert  the  chapter  to  which  allusion  is  made  in 
the  last  paragraph. 

Concerning  the  obligation  of  the  constitution  of  the  Carthu- 
siahs.  (No.  46,  Vol.  II.,  p.  82.) 

"  Is  the  constitution  of  the  Carthusians,  by  which  all  eat- 
ing of  meats  is  forbidden,  under  mortal  sin,  obligatory  when 
life  is  in  extreme  danger  ? 

"  Ans.  If  other  articles  of  food  are  not  at  hand,  they 


268  OF  SUICIDE. 

eat  meats  lawfully  ;  indeed  they  are  obliged  to  eat  them, 
lest  they  may  perish  of  hunger :  because  their  constitution 
cannot  include  this  case,  as  it  cannot  oblige  them  to  perish 
with  hunger.  The  case  would  be  the  same,  if  there  were  no 
other  except  poisoned  articles  of  food  at  hand ;  because  these 
are  not  naturally  adapted  to  sustain  life. 

"  But  if  other  articles  of  food  may  be  supplied,  it  is  not 
lawful  for  them  to  eat  meats,  even  if  in  the  judgment  of  phy- 
sicians the  eating  of  them  would  be  necessary  for  the  pre- 
servation of  life.  The  reason  is,  because  their  constitutions, 
approved  by  the  church,  most  strictly  forbid  the  eating  of 
meat :  and  the  ancient  custom  of  this  order  teaches  that  this 
prohibition  holds  good  even  in  this  case. 

"  Besides,  this  rigour  is  necessary  for  the  preservation  of 
the  strength  and  honour  of  this  institution,  which  would  easily 
decline,  if  a  dispensation  should  be  granted  even  in  a  single 
instance,  as  the  event  has  frequently  shown  in  other  religious 
orders,  and  also  sometimes  in  this  itself:  which  Vasquey  re- 
cords that  he  had  himself  heard  from  the  strictest  fathers  of 
this  order. 

"  Ohj.  A  Carthusian  who  has  no  food  except  meats,  is 
obliged  to  feed  on  meats,  as  was  said  above :  but  when  he 
cannot  preserve  life  without  meats,  it  is  the  same  to  him  as 
if  he  could  have  no  other  food  :  therefore,  he  then  lawfully 
eats  meat. 

*'  Ans.  I  deny  the  minor :  for  although  other  articles  of 
food  might  be  thought  not  advantageous,  yet  certainly  they 
are  sufficient  in  themselves,  and  serve  to  sustain  life :  and 
hence,  although  the  sick  man  may  perhaps  die  from  the 
disease,  yet  he  cannot  be  said  to  die  of  hunger :  and  there- 
fore it  is  not  the  same  as  if  no  food  was  at  hand :  therefore, 
the  eating  of  meats  in  this  case  can  only  be  regarded  as 
medicine ;  but  just  as  a  sick  man  is  not  obliged  to  procure 
the  most  costly  medicines,  although  others  may  seem  of  no 
advantage,  so  neither  is  the  Carthusian  obliged  to  eat  meats, 
which  would  be  very  injurious  to  his  order,  by  relaxing  dis- 
cipline, &c." 

To  most  of  the  preceding  chapters,  I  have  thought  it  ad- 
visable to  subjoin  short  refutations  of  the  erroneous  and  un- 
scriptural  principles,  which  are  inculcated  in  the  theology  of 


OF  SUICIDE.  269 

the  Romish  Church ;  but  it  will  not  he  necessary  to  offer  one 
word  of  comment,  when  the  poison  is  so  rank,  that  no  sane 
man  would  touch  it,  and  my  readers  will  therefore  under- 
stand why  it  is  that  in  subsequent  chapters,  I  shall  often  re- 
frain entirely  from  commenting  upon  the  text,  which  Peter 
Dens  offers.  Whenever  there  is  anything  so  specious  that 
an  honest  man  might  be  deceived,  I  shall  feel  it  my"  duty,  for 
the  sake  of  those  who  may  not  always  be  prepared  to  sepa- 
rate the  precious  from  the  vile,  to  furnish  suggestions,  which 
will  perhaps  not  be  altogether  unprofitable. 

Not  a  few  of  the  subjects  upon  which  we  are  about  to  enter 
are  of  a  somewhat  delicate  nature,  and  in  many  instances  I 
shall  therefore  be  obliged  to  condense  and  give  a  mere  out- 
line, in  order  that  details,  offensive  to  modesty,  may  be 
avoided.  I  wish  to  present  a  fair  and  full  exposition  of  the 
principles,  which  are  inculcated  in  Romish  Seminaries,  in  so 
far  as  I  can  accomplish  it  without  defiling  my  pages  with 
anything  indecent  or  obscene ;  at  the  same  time,  however,  I 
shall  not  suffer  myself  to  be  hampered  by  prudery,  or  false 
modesty ;  I  shall  spread  before  Protestants  and  Papists,  so 
much  of  the  theology  (/)  of  Romish  priests,  that  it  will  be  an 
easy  matter  for  an  ordinary  imagination  to  supply  as  much 
of  the  suppressed  matter  as  a  decent  person  would  choose  to 
know.  But  whilst 'endeavouring  to  present  my  reader  with  a 
correct  idea  of  Peter  Dens'  theology,  I  shall  not  designedly 
pander  to  the  depraved  curiosity  of  any  vicious  mind. 


23 


270  OF  HOMICIDE. 


CHAPTER  XXVir. 


OF   HOMICIDE.       (No.  122.) 

"  What  is  homicide  ? 

"  It  is  the  voluntary  and  unjust  killing  of  a  person.  It 
is  forbidden  both  by  natural  and  by  positive  and  divine  law, 
*  Thou  shalt  not  kill.' 

"Is  the  killing  of  irrational  animals  also  forbidden  by  the 
command,  *  Thou  shalt  not  kill  V 

"  No.  For  God,  Gen.  ix.  3.,  has  expressly  permitted  this : 
''Every  thing  that  moveth  and  liveth  shall  be  meat  for  you.' 

"  St.  Thomas  observes  that  by  killing  animals  in  a  cryel 
manner  a  certain  impropriety  may  be  committed ;  for  ani- 
mals have  been  left  not  for  our  cruelty  but  for  our  use.  This 
cruelty  Sacred  Scripture  also  condemns  ;  Prov.  xii.  10.  *  The 
just  regardeth  the  lives  of  his  beasts ;  but  the  bowels  of  the 
wicked  are  cruel.' 

"  Whether  the  eating  of  meats  was  permitted  before  the 
deluge,  is  disputed :  Sylvius  thinks  that  it  was  permitted,  but 

THAT  THE  MORE  RELIGIOUS    ABSTAINED  FROM  IT. 

*'  Explain  the  command,  *  Thou  shalt  not  kill.' 

"  By  this  command,  not  only  homicide  is  forbidden,  but 
also  mutilation,  wounding,  whipping,  &c.,  and  whatever  tends 
to  the  injury  of  a  neighbour's  person. 

"  Indirectly,  gentleness,  patience,  peace,  love,  beneficence, 
&c.,  are  enjoined,  as  the  Roman  catechism  explains,  part  3., 
concerning  the  fifth  precept  of  the  decalogue. 

"  Is  every  killing  of  a  person,  under  all  circumstances, 
forbidden  by  this  precept? 

"  No :  but  that  which  is  committed  by  private  authority, 
without  either  the  command  or  permission  of  God :  hence, 
in  the  definition  of  homicide,  it  was  said  that  it  is  the  unjust 
killing  of  a  person. 

"  What  killing  of  a  person  is  not  forbidden  by  this  pre- 
cept? 

"That  which  is  done  by  divine  authority :  Thus,  1.  Abra- 


OF  HOMICIDE.  271 

ham  did  not  sin,  who,  at  the  command  of  God,  was  willing 
to  kill  his  own  son  Isaac,  Gen.  ch.  xxii.  ver.  10. 

"  2.  Nor  does  the  state,  which  puts  malefactors  to  death  : 
as  God  has  likewise  given  this  power  to  the  state  for  the  com- 
mon good,  as  will  be  proved  in  the  following  number. 

"  3.  Nor  they  who  wage  war  justly  by  slaying  the  ene- 
mies :  for  Sacred  Scripture,  the  fathers,  and  the  practice  of 
the  most  conscientious  rulers  abundantly  prove  that  this  pow- 
er has  been  divinely  given.  The  conditions  of  a  just  war, 
see  briefly  in  the  Analogy  of  Becanus,  ch.  xviii.,  quest.  1." 

"  Is  it  lawful  to  Mil  malefactors  hy  puhlic  authority  ? 
(No.  122.) 

"It  is  not  only  lawful,  but  it  is  also  commanded  by  pub- 
lic authority  and  due  process  of  law  to  put  to  death  criminals 
who  are  hurtful  to  the  state :  such  as  robbers,  incendiaries, 
sacrilegious  persons,  thieves,  &c.  This  was  enacted  in  the 
Third  Lateran  Council  against  the  Waldenses. 

"  It  is  proved  from  the  divine  permission  granted,  Exod. 
xxii.  18.  'Wizards  thou  shalt  not  suffer  to  live.'  And  Rom. 
xiii.  4.  *  If  thou  do  that  which  is  evil,  fear :  for  he  beareth 
not  the  sword  in  vain,  for  he  is  the  minister  of  God,  an  aven- 
ger to  execute  wrath  upon  him  that  doeth  evil.' 

"  Add  to  this  also  natural  reason,  which  dictates  that  a 
limb  must  be  amputated,  when  by  it  the  destruction  of  the 
whole  body  is  threatened :  but  from  these  pernicious  male- 
factors there  is  danger  of  the  corruption  and  disturbance  of 
the  state ;  therefore,  &c. 

"  May  the  state  at  its  option  put  to  death  any  malefactors 
whatever  ? 

"  No :  but  only  such  as  are  very  injurious  to  the  state : 
and  hence,  in  this  case,  the  grievousness  or  malice  of  the 
sin,  in  itself  considered,  is  not  to  be  regarded,  but  the  injury 
which  it  occasions  to  the  republic. 

"  Hence  the  military  laws  are  just,  which  decree  the  pen- 
alty of  death  for  faults  in  themselves  slight,  for  trifling  dis- 
obedience, neglecting  trust,  petty  theft,  &c. ;  because  from 
faults  of  this  kind,  although  they  are  in  themselves  trifling, 
he  most  grievous  evils  might  arise  to  the  state,  unless  they 
were  most  strictly  forbidden. 


I 


272  OF  HOMICIDE. 

"  Is  it  lawful  to  put  a  man  to  death  for  mere  theft  ? 

"  Yes :  when  this  is  seriously  pernicious  to  the  state :  and 
this  the  practice  of  tribunals  approves. 

"  Nor  is  it  any  matter  that  the  punishment  seems  dispro- 
portioned  to  the  offence,  when  any  one  is  deprived  of  life  on 
account  of  the  loss  of  temporal  property ;  for  from  what  has 
been  said  before,  it  may  be  observed  that  the  punishment  is 
not  inflicted  for  the  theft  of  another  man's  property,  in  itself 
considered,  but  for  the  sake  of  the  injury  which  is  inflicted 
on  the  peace  and  tranquillity  of  the  state. 

"  Ohj.  St.  Thomas  says,  &c. :  '  For  a  theft  which  does 
not  inflict  an  irreparable  loss,  the  penalty  of  death  is  not  in- 
flicted according  to  present  judgment,  except  the  theft  is  ag- 
gravated by  some  important  circumstance.' 

"  Ans.  St.  Thomas  only  says  that  in  his  time,  according 
to  the  old  imperial  laws,  mere  thefts  were  not  punished  with 
death. 

"  Many  authors  accuse  Scotus  in  4  dest.  15,  quest.  3,  as 
though  he  had  taught  that  it  is  not  lawful  to  put  thieves  to 
death,  nor  any  others  than  those  expressed  in  the  old  law. 
But  Herinx,  Henno,  and  other  Scotists,  endeavour  to  offer 
an  explanation  for  him,  and  reply  to  the  passage  quoted  as 
we  reply  to  St.  Thomas. 

"  Is  it  lawful,  by  public  authority,  to  put  to  death  an  inno- 
cent person  ? 

"  Ans.  In  no  case  is  it  directly  lawful  to  put  to  death  an 
innocent  person,  unless  God  has  expressly  commanded  it. 
Hence,  on  account  of  the  expressed  command  of  God  alone 
are  the  Israelites  excused  for  killing  all  whom  they  found  in 
the  city  of  Jericho,  from  the  infant  to  the  old  man,  Jos.  vi. 
21.  Thus  also  David  is  excused  when,  2  Kings  xxi.  9,  (2 
Sam.,)  he  gave  up  the  seven  sons  of  Saul,  that  they  might 
be  crucified  by  the  Gibeonites  for  the  sins  of  Saul  when  de- 
ceased. A  similar  command  also  God  gave  to  Saul  with 
respect  to  the  Amalekites,  1  Kings  xv.  3,  (1  Sam.) 

"  Is  it  not  certainly  lawful  for  a  state  indirectly  to  put  in- 
nocent persons  to  death  ? 

"  It  is  lawful  for  the  state  for  a  just  cause  to  do  or  omit 
any  thing  from  which  the  death  of  an  innocent  person  fol- 
lows not  intending  it,  which  is  as  it  were  indirectly  to  put  to 
death.     Thus,  a  commander  justly  besieging  a  city  lawfully 


OF  HOMICIDE.  273 

explodes  and  overthrows  a  tower  in  which  are  innocent  per- 
sons, if  otherwise  he  cannot  storm  the  city  :  because  that 
general  avails  himself  of  his  right ;  and  thus  an  effect  can- 
not be  imputed  to  him  which  has  followed  beyond  his  inten- 
tion. 

"  In  the  same  way,  if  a  king  besieging  a  city  threatens 
totally  to  overthrow  it,  unless  some  innocent  person  be  sent 
to  him,  the  authors  commonly  resolve  that  the  state  may 
send  the  innocent  man  himself,  and  even  deliver  him  to  the 
king,  not  with  the  intention  that  he  may  be  killed  by  him, 
but  with  the  intention  that  the  country  may  be  freed.  In  this 
way,  St.  Thomas  excuses  Simon,  who  sent  the  two  sons 
of  Jonathan  to  Tripho,  1  Mach.  ch.  xiii. 

"  In  this  case,  indeed,  that  innocent  person  seems  obliged 
to  expose  his  own  life  for  the  common  good ;  and,  according 
to  Daelman,  he  would  become  guilty  of  a  grievous  offence 
against  the  state,  if  he  should  refuse  to  go  to  the  king,  and 
as  such  he  might  be  given  up. 

"  The  case  would  be  different  if  that  innocent  person 
were  in  no  way  a  subject  of  that  place :  because  a  stranger 
is  not  bound  to  undergo  death  for  the  sake  of  a  foreign  state ; 
yet  the  state  might  compel  such  a  stranger  lurking  within 
her  jurisdiction  to  depart  with  danger  of  death. 

"  ObJ.  I.  From  this  mission  the  death  of  an  innocent 
person  follows,  and  the  freedom  of  the  state  only  from  the 
changed  will  of  the  king ;  therefore,  &c. 

"  I  answer,  that  from  this  mission  the  death  of  an  inno- 
cent person  does  not  follow  immediately,  but  from  the 
depraved  will  of  the  king  :  but  when  a  bad  effect  follows 
only  mediately,  a  good  one  should  follow  only  mediately. 

*'  Obj.  11.  It  would  not  be  lawful  in  any  case  to  give  up 
an  innocent  person  to  wild  beasts,  nor  the  sacred  books  to  be 
profaned  by  a  king ;  therefore,  &c. 

"  Ans.  I  deny  the  inference :  as  to  the  first,  there  is  this 
difference  :  that  wild  beasts  naturally  are  savage  and  devour  ; 
and  thus  they  who  cast  a  person  to  wild  beasts,  put  him 
directly  to  death ;  but  the  king  acts  freely,  and  thus  he  him- 
self, who  does  not  send  directly,  puts  to  death. 

"  As  for  the  second,  there  is  this  difference,  that  by  the 
profanation  of  the  sacred  books,  an  injury  is  done  to  God 
h'mself,  and  to  religion,  which  is  much  more  serious  than 
23* 


274  OF  HOMICIDE. 

any  injury  inflicted  on  the  commonwealth ;  besides,  the 
sacred  manuscripts  are  of  a  higher  order,  and  are  not  or- 
dained for  the  preservation  of  the  state,  but  for  the  salvation 
of  souls ;  but  the  members  of  a  community  are  ordained  for 
the  preservation  of  the  community. 

«  Various  examples  of  the  Holy  Martyrs  add  to  the  -con- 
firmation of  this  opinion,  who  chose  rather  to  die  than  give 
up  the  sacred  manuscripts  into  the  hands  of  kings,  as  is  to 
be  seen  in  the  Roman  martyrology,  on  the  second  day  of 
January,  and  on  the  eleventh  of  February. 

"  For  the  same  reason  it  is  thought  that  it  is  not  lawful  to 
send  a  virgin  to  a  king  to  be  defiled :  because  the  chastity 
of  a  virgin  is  not  so  ordained  for  the  preservation  of  the  state 
as  the  life  of  an  innocent  subject.  Besides,  in  the  case  of  a 
virgin,  there  is  the  proximate  danger  lest  she  may  consent  to 
his  lust ;  and  such  danger  there  is  not  in  case  of  putting  to 
death  an  innocent  person :  so  that,  on  this  account,  the  state 
might  maintain  itself  permissively  in  the  case  of  the  innocent 
person,  rather  than  in  the  case  of  the  virgin." 

In  the  following  sections,  cases  are  proposed  in  which  it 
is  asked  whether  homicide  may  be  lawfully  committed.  By 
private  authority  it  is  never  lawful  to  put  a  man  to  death. 
Banditti,  who  are  outlawed,  and  may  therefore  be  killed  by 
any  one,  are  considered  as  being  put  to  death  by  public 
authority.  A  husband  is  not  at  liberty  to  put  a  wife  to  death, 
when  taken  in  the  act  of  adultery.  It  is  the  more  common 
spinion  of  the  doctors  that  it  is  lawful  to  take  lives  in  self- 
defence.  The  following  proposition  has  been  condemned  by 
Alexander  VII.  "  It  is  lawful  to  kill  a  false  accuser,  false 
witnesses,  and  even  the  judge  by  whom  an  unjust  sentence 
is  certainly  threatened,  if  the  innocent  person  can  in  no 
other  way  escape  injury."  But  when  the  moderation  of 
a  blameless  defence  is  preserved,  homicide  is  lawful.  The 
conditions  are  the  following  (No.  125). 

"  Firsts  that  the  defence  be  not  made  in  order  to  take 
revenge,  but  in  order  to  repel  injury.  Against  this  condition 
he  sins,  who  defends  himself  through  anger,  hatred,  or  re- 
venge. 

"  Second  :  that  the  attacked  person  does  not  use  greater  de- 
fensive force  than  may  be  necessary  to  avert  the  threatened 
death ;  hence,  if  the  attacked  person  may  escape  by  fleeing, 


OF  HOMICIDE.  275 

crying  out,  thrusting  aside  the  weapons  of  the  assailant, 
wounding,  &c.,  he  defends  himself  unlawfully  by  the  death 
of  the  assailant. 

"  Third  :  that  real  violence  is  offered  ;  otherwise  it  would 
not  be  defence  but  aggression;  and  that  the  defendant  repels 
the  offered  violence,  by  violence  of  a  similar  nature. 

"  Hence,  you  may  not  anticipate  and  kill  him  who  threat- 
ens you  with  death  only  by  menaces ;  nor  a  robber  who 
meets  you,  and  attempts  nothing  against  you  by  any  action ; 
nor  even  him  who,  by  deceit,  treachery,  or  calumny,  endea- 
vours to  inflict  death  upon  you,  say  a  false  accuser,  a  false 
witness,  &c. ;  as  is  plain  from  the  condemned  proposition 
above  quoted. 

"  But  do  not  understand  these  remarks,  as  if  the  assailed 
person  ought  to  wait  until  the  assailant  shall  have  given  the 
first  stroke ;  but  it  is  sufficient  that  he  does  something,  by 
which  ho  may  be  morally  regarded  as  attacking;  for  in- 
stance, if  he  already  draws  a  sword,  &c. 

"  Fourth  :  that  the  good  effect  of  the  defence  may  exceed 
or  at  least  equal  the  bad  effect :  otherwise  a  just  cause  would 
be  wanting.     See  this  at  large  in  De  Cocq  and  Daelman. 

"  Fifth  :  that  a  bad  effect  do  not  immediately  and  directly 
ensue,  and  the  good  effect  only  mediately  and  indirectly  :  be- 
cause this  would  be  to  do  evil  that  good  may  result.  Hence 
it  is  not  lawful  to  throw  an  infant  into  a  well,  that  it  may  be 
baptized. 

"  Sixth  :  that  the  death  of  the  assailant  be  not  intended, 
neither  as  end,  nor  as  means,  nor  as  the  effect  of  defence ; 
because,  as  it  is  unlawful  by  private  authority  to  kill  a  person, 
it  is  also  unlawful  that  an  attacked  person  should  intend  to 
kill  the  assailant. 

"  These  conditions  being  supplied,  it  is  no  sin,  not  even 
against  charity,  (as  the  common  opinion  teaches,)  to  defend 
one's  own  life  by  killing  an  unjust  assailant :  unless  the  per- 
son should  perhaps  be  necessary,  or  very  useful  to  the  state, 
or  some  other  circumstance  should  be  in  the  way,  which 
might  dictate,  that  the  life  of  the  assailant  should  be  preferred 
to  the  life  of  the  assailed." 

After  adducing  as  proofs,  a  sentence  from  Augustine  and 
the  Roman  Catechism,  and  Clement,  the  last  authority  quoted 
is  St.  Thomas,  as  follows. 


276  OF  HOMICIDE. 

"  It  is  proved  4th,  from  the  reasons  of  St.  Thomas,  q.  64, 
art.  7,  of  which  the  first  is  that  according  to  justice  it  is  law- 
ful to  repel  force  by  force;  second,  because  in  itself  con- 
sidered, and  other  things  being  equal,  a  man  is  bound  to  pro- 
vide more  for  his  own  life  than  for  that  of  another :  the  third 
and  principal  reason,  is,  that  the  killing  of  an  assailant  in 
this  case  is  not  voluntary,  because  it  is  beyond  intention  ;  for, 
as  from  such  a  defence  one's  own  preservation  immediately 
follows,  as  well  as  the  death  of  the  assailant,  it  is  lawful 
thus  to  defend  one's  self  by  intending  a  good  effect,  and  by 
permitting  a  bad  effect. 

"  Here  several  justly  remark,  that  these  and  similar  things 
ought  not  to  be  preached  to  the  people,  lest  it  should  too  much 
extend  the  license ;  these  things  are  to  be  very  rarely  advised, 
because  it  is  seldom  that  another  means  of  escape  is  wanting." 

The  128th  section  discusses  the  question,  whether  it  is 
lawful,  in  defence  of  chastity,  to  kill  the  assailant  ? 

"  The  negative  opinion,  as  it  is  in  our  day  the  more  com- 
mon, seems  also  more  correct,  and  to  be  practically  ob- 
served." 

"It  is  proved,  1.  Because  chastity  is  taken  either  for  a 
virtue  of  the  mind  ;  and  this  cannot  be  taken  from  those  who 
withhold  their  consent :  and  hence  Saint  Lucia  said  to  the 
tyrant :  '  If  you  command  me  to  be  violated  against  my  will, 
my  chastity  will  be  doubled  to  a  crown ;'  or  it  is  taken  for 
the  integrity  of  the  body;  and  this  is  of  inferior  value  to  the 
life  of  a  man,  and  therefore  cannot  be  preferred  to  the  life  of 
an  assailant :  therefore,  a  person  defending  chastity  thus  un- 
derstood, by  killing  the  assailant,  would  not  preserve  the  mo- 
deration of  blameless  defence. 

"  It  is  proved  2,  from  St.  Aug.,  Book  I.,  concerning  free 
will,  chap.  5,  where  he  says  :  'I  do  not  indeed  find  fault  with 
the  law,  (it  was  the  civil  law,  by  which  assailers  of  chastity 
were  slain  with  impunity,)  which  permits  such  persons  to  be 
killed  with  impunity  ;  but  on  what  condition  I  shall  defend 
those  who  kill,  I  cannot  discover.' 

"  Add  to  this,  that  among  the  Saints,  whom  the  church 
worships,  we  read  of  none  who  made  use  of  this  defence,  al- 
though doubtless,  sometimes  opportunity  would  have  been 
afforded.  Nor  is  this  case  also  found  excepted  from  the 
general  law,  '  Thou  shalt  not  Mil.'* 


OF  HOMICIDE.  277 

"In  the  loss  of  chastity,  there  is  danger  of  consenting  to 
the  lust  of  another,  unless  the  assailant  is  slain ;  therefore,  he 

is  lawfully  killed. 

****** 

"  Ans.  Admitting  also  that  the  danger  of  consenting  is 
very  probable,  it  would  not  therefore  be  lawful  thus  to  defend 
one's  self:  because  it  is  not  lawful  to  commit  the  certain  sin 
of  killing  a  person,  in  order  that  an  uncertain  one  may  be 
avoided.  '  For  who  can  be  so  foolish,'  (says  St.  Augustine,) 
*  as  to  say.  Let  us  sin  now,  lest  perhaps,  we  may  sin  after- 
wards :  let  us  commit  homicide  now,  lest  perchance  we  may 

afterwards  fall  into  adultery.' 

****** 

"  Obj.  IV.  S.  Aug.,  book  against  lying,  says  that  it  is  less 
wicked  to  lie  in  order  to  preserve  chastity  than  to  preserve 
life ;  but  life  may  be  defended  by  killing  the  assailant ;  there- 
fore chastity  also. 

^^  Ans.  The  text  of  St.  Aug.,  in  which  our  opponents 
wonderfully  rejoice,  treats  evidently  concerning  chastity  as  it 
is  a  virtue  of  the  mind. 

*'  It  is  to  be  observed,  that,  although  a  person,  whose  chas- 
tity is  invaded,  may  not  kill  the  assailant,  yet  she  is  bound  in 
every  possible  way  to  resist  by  fleeing,  crying  out,  struggling 
with  hands  and  feet,  &c.,  &;c. 

f*  Concerning  kisses  and  immodest  embraces,  &c.,  it  must 
be  said,  that  even  afterwards,  the  person  who  has  suffered 
violence,  may  defend  herself,  for  instance,  by  giving  the  fu- 
gitive a  box  on  the  ear  ;  not  indeed  for  revenge,  but  as  an 
evidence  of  indignation  ;  that  thus  for  the  future  the  immodest 
aggressor  may  be  deterred."  (! !) 

Concerning  Duelling.  (132.) 

«  What  is  a  duel  1 

"  It  is  a  contest  between  two  or  more  by  agreement,  at  an 
appointed  time  and  place  without  public  authority,  under- 
taken with  deliberate  intention  with  the  risk  of  killing. 

"  Hence,  if  two  persons  without  any  agreement,  or  with- 
out a  determination  of  time  and  place,  flying  into  a  passion 
take  up  weapons  and  fight,  it  will  not  be  properly  called  a 
duel. 

"  It  is  considered  a  duel  properly  so  called,  if  two  persons 


278  OF  HOMICIDE. 

beginning  to  quarrel,  v.  g.  in  church,  say  mutually  one  to 
another.  This  is  not  a  fit  place  to  settle  our  disputes :  let  us 
go  out  of  doors,  or  let  us  go  into  the  next  street ;  and  thus 
begin  a  fight.  Also,  if  they  say.  Let  us  fight  with  swords, 
in  the  first  place  which  shall  occur  for  battle  more  conveni- 
ent than  this :  because  in  these  instances,  place,  time,  &c., 
are  sufficiently  determined.  Collet  adds  that  it  is  a  duel,  if 
they  resolve  to  fight  with  swords,  whenever  the  one  may 
meet  the  other  alone. 

"  It  is  not  a  duel,  if  the  battle  is  commenced  without  dan- 
ger of  killing :  yet  a  moral  danger  is  sufficient :  such  as,  if 
the  fight  be  commenced  under  this  condition ;  let  us  stand 
until  the  first  effiision  of  blood. 

"  The  weapons,  also,  with  which  they  fight,  should  in 
these  circumstances  be  morally  deadly :  such  as  a  sword, 
knife,  stones,  heavy  clubs,  &c.  But  if  it  be  done  with 
hands  only,  it  is  not  thought  that  such  a  danger  is  incurred. 

**  How  is  duelling  divided? 

"Into  simple,  and  ceremonial;  also,  into  public,  and 
secret. 

"  A  ceremonial  one  is  that  in  which  certain  ceremonies 
are  used  ;  as  the  designation  of  weapons,  election  of  seconds, 
assumption  of  witnesses,  &c.  A  simple  one  is  that  which 
takes  place  without  these  ceremonies. 

"  By  what  law  is  duelling  prohibited  ? 

"  By  the  natural,  positive  divine,  and  human  law,  as  well 
civil  as  ecclesiastical. 

"  In  what  consists  the  wickedness  of  duelling  ? 

"  In  this,  that  each  of  the  duellists  throws  himself  into 
the  peril  of  eternal  damnation,  squanders  his  own  life  and 
that  of  another,  and  attempts  to  kill  by  private  authority : 
the  person  challenging  is  besides  guilty  of  gross  scandal 
against  the  person  challenged,  the  seconds  and  witnesses. 

"  Is  duelling  always  unlawful  1 

"  A  duel  commenced  by  private  authority  under  any  pre- 
text whatever,  or  for  the  sake  of  displaying  strength,  or  of 
defending  honour,  or  reputation,  is  always  unlawful :  the 
reason  is  that  for  these  causes,  it  is  never  lawful  to  kill. 
But  when  undertaken  in  order  to  settle  some  obscure  ques- 
tion, or  to  ascertain  justice,  or  truth  ;  it  is,  moreover,  super- 
stition, or  tempting  God. 


OF  HOMICIDE.  279 

'*  Ohj.  If  a  noble  or  military  man  does  not  accept  a  duel 
he  will  be  regarded  as  infamous ;  therefore,  &c. 

"  Be  it  so  that  he  might  be  so  considered,  it  would  not 
therefore  be  lawful  to  engage  in  a  duel ;  as  according  to 
No.  129,  it  is  unlawful  to  kill  an  unjust  assailant  of  reputa- 
tion, or  honour :  but  how  utterly  false  it  is  too,  that  any 
thing  truly  disgraceful  can  be  found  in  the  refusal  of  a 
duel :  and  hence  our  rulers  resolved  on  the  27th  of  Feb.  A. 
D.  1610,  to  this  effect,  art.  4.  '  Since  most  duels  have  their 
origin  in  a  wrong  opinion,  as  if  they  were  hindered  by  un- 
manly fear,  who  do  not  avenge  insults  or  revenge  with  their 
own  hand :  the  rulers  declare  that  this  opinion  is  false ;  they 
take  under  their  protection  the  honour  of  those  who  have 
suffered  insults ;  and  they  forbid  any  one  to  upbraid  under 
the  arbitrary  penalty  of  their  indignation.'  The  same  was 
renewed  in  the  year  1660,  Aug.  19,  art.  5. 

"  St.  Lewis,  Henry  IV.,  and  Lewis  XIV.,  decreed  as  to 
France,  that  they  who  fought  in  a  duel  should  be  regarded  as 
guilty  of  an  offence  against  divine  and  human  majesty,  and 
that  their  bodies  should  be  cast  to  wild  beasts. 

"  Hence,  also,  Alexander  VII.  justly  condemned  this  pro- 
position. 'A  knight  challenged  to  a  duel  may  accept  it, 
lest  he  should  incur  the  mark  of  infamy  amongst  others.' 

"  May  a  duel  entered  upon  by  public  authority  be  law- 
ful? 

"  Yes ;  princes  may  certainly  agree  about  a  fixed  time 
and  place,  in  order  that  one  or  more,  chosen  on  both  sides, 
may  fight  in  order  to  terminate  a  just  war,  the  event  of 
which  is  uncertain,  in  order  that  thus  a  multitude  may  be 
spared :  nor  is  this  properly  called  a  duel,  but  a  certain  kind 
of  just  war  in  behalf  of  the  state.  An  example  is  afforded 
in  David  meeting  with  Goliath. 

"  Is  he  who  kills  or  mutilates  another  in  a  duel,  obliged 
to  make  restitution  ? 

"  If  the  person  killed  or  mutilated,  has  accepted  the  duel 
freely,  induced  by  no  force,  fraud,  or  treachery,  and  could 
in  a  valid  manner  waive  the  right  of  restitution,  the  person 
who  has  killed  or  mutilated  him,  does  not  appear  to  be 
obliged  to  make  restitution :  because  they  are  believed 
mutually  to  remit  restitution  to  one  another  ;  it  must  be  de- 


280  OF  HOMICIDE. 

termined  otherwise,  if  he  has  been  induced  by  force  or  fraud, 
or  has  not  been  able  to  waive  his  right  in  a  valid  manner." 

Concerning  the  punishments  of  Duellists.   (133.) 

"  What  are  the  punishments  of  duellists  ? 

"  They  are  various,  as  well  ecclesiastical  as  civil,  and 
those  very  severe. 

"1,  First:  by  virtue  of  Council  of  Trent,  sess.  25. 
concerning  the  Reformation,  ch.  19.,  temporal  lords  are  ex- 
communicated, who  grant  room  in  their  territories  for  a  duel 
between  Christians. 

"  They,  also,  are  excommunicated,  who  have  fought  the 
battle,  and  their  seconds :  and  these  all  incur  the  penalty  of 
perpetual  infamy,  and  the  confiscation  of  all  their  property. 

"  They  also  are  excommunicated,  who  have  given  counsel 
in  the  case  of  a  duel  as  well  in  right  as  in  fact ;  also  spectators, 
viz.,  such  as  are  present  by  appointment  and  intentionally, 
&c.  &c. 

"  The  second  penalty  appointed  by  the  Council  of  Trent 
is,  that  if  they  die  in  the  very  act  of  conflict,  they  must  for 
ever  be  without  ecclesiastical  burial,  even  if  (says  the  Mech- 
lin Manual),  before  death,  they  have  given  signs  of  penitence ; 
indeed,  even  if  they  have  been  sacramentally  absolved  by 
the  priest. 

"  Authors  have  commonly  resolved,  that  he  who,  having 
received  a  wound  in  the  duel,  does  -not  die  immediately, 
should  not  be  deprived  of  ecclesiastical  burial ;  because  such 
a  one  cannot  be  said  to  have  died  in  the  very  conflict ;  but 
Benedict,  XIV.,  in  his  Bull,  Detestabilem,  of  the  year 
1752,  decreed,  1.  that  every  one,  whatsoever,  dying  from  a 
wound  received  in  a  duel,  whether  he  died  on  the  battle- 
ground or  elsewhere,  is  to  be  deprived  of  ecclesiastical 
burial ;  and  he  takes  away  from  the  Bishops  the  power  of 
dispensing  upon  this  penalty.  Yet  if  the  duel  is  secret,  they 
should  not  be  deprived  of  ecclesiastical  burial :  because  secret 
crimes  ought  not  to  be  punished  by  a  public  penalty.  In  a 
doubtful  case,  recourse  must  be  had  to  the  ordinary. 

"  The  third  penalty  is  that  by  which  a  person  killing  a 
man  in  a  duel,  incurs  an  irregularity  reserved  to  the  Supreme 
Pontiff: 


OF  HOMICIDE.  281 

"  According  to  the  edict  of  the  Archduke  Albert  and  Duchess 
Isabella,  of  the  year  1610,  renewed  Oct.  26,  1626,  duellists 
are  punished  with  death,  as  well  those  who  accept,  as  those 
who  give  a  challenge,  also  with  the  confiscation  of  their  pro- 
perty. 

"  Art.  2.  Challengers  are  declared  infamous,  are  deprived 
of  all  rank,  honour,  and  pension,  and  the  half  of  their  pro- 
perty is  forfeited. 

"  Finally,  they  who  carry  messages  or  letters  containing 
a  challenge,  or  who  have  assisted  duellists  in  any  manner 
whatsoever,  or  have  accompanied  them,  are  punished  with 
death  and  the  confiscation  of  their  property. 

"  In  what  way  shall  a  common  confessor  treat  a  duellist, 
who  from  a  wound  inflicted  on  him  is  in  the  article  of  death, 
and  begs  to  be  absolved  1 

"  As  regards  reservation  or  excommunication,  nothing 
hinders  from  absolving  him ;  because,  in  the  article  of  death, 
there  is  no  reservation  ;  but  he  is  to  be  induced  as  effectually 
as  possible  to  lay  aside  all  rancour  of  mind,  and  the  spirit 
of  revenge;  looking  at  the  example  of  Christ:  besides  when 
time  permits  the  delay,  it  should  be  imposed  on  him  that  he 
take  care,  or  even  an  oath  that  if  he  recovers  he  will  abide 
by  the  commands  of  the  church,  and  absolutely  make 
amends  for  all  losses  inflicted  on  the  injured  party,  if  he 
owes  any. 

"  But  generally  the  confessor  ought  to  inquire  of  the  peni- 
tent confessing  a  duel :  1st,  whether  he  was  the  challenged 
party  or  the  challenger':  2d,  what  is  the  quality  of  each  per- 
son :  3d,  whether  he  had  cherished  hatred,  and  for  what 
time :  4th,  whether  he  has  killed  the  other  in  the  duel,  &c. 

"  It  i§  to  be  observed,  that  soldiers,  noble  officers,  &c., 
who  in  the  preparation  of  mind  are  always  ready  to  engage 
in  a  duel,  whenever  it  is  offered  them,  can  not  be  absolved  ; 
yet  if  they  seem  disposed,  they  are  not  to  be  interrogated  in 
particular,  whether  they  might  have  done  the  same  when  an 
occasion  offered,  but  they  are  rather  to  be  severely  rebuked, 
by  placing  before  their  eyes  the  enormity  of  the  sin,  and  the 
danger  of  ruining  body  and  soul,  to  which  they  have  exposed 
themselves ;  and  they  are  to  be  strongly  warned  not  to  dare 
attempt  it  in  future." 
24 


282  OF  HOMICIDE. 

The  following  sections  are  offered  to  the  reader  as  a  spe- 
cimen of  the  puerile  and  filthy  casuistry,  which  constitutes  so 
large  a  portion  of  the  diviniti/,  which  Roman  doctors  teach, 
and  which  Roman  priests  are  taught. 

Concerning  Abortion.  (134.) 

*'  That  the  foetus  is  alive  long  before  birth  is  certain  from 
daily  experience ;  as  many  who  have  been  cut  out  of  the 
womb  of  the  mother  have  survived  a  long  time :  and  hence, 
Innocent  XI.  justly  condemned  this  35th  proposition  :  <  It 
seems  probable  that  every  fostus,  so  long  as  it  is  in  the 
womb,  is  without  a  rational  soul ;  and  that  it  then  first  begins 
to  have  it,  when  it  is  born;  and  consequently  it  must  be 
said,  that  in  no  abortion  is  homicide  committed.' 

"  As  regards  the  incurring  of  punishments,  in  order  that 
some  thing  certain  in  practice  may  be  afforded,  authors  com- 
monly suppose  that  they  are  incurred  by  procuring  abortion 
after  the  fortieth  day  of  the  conception,  if  it  is  a  male,  and  after 
the  eightieth  day  if  it  is  a  female ;  and  when  it  is  doubtful 
whether  it  is  a  male  or  female,  it  is  presumed  in  the  court  of 
conscience  to  be  a  male ;  that  this  was  the  practice  of  the 
Holy  Penitentiary,  Narsarrus  attests,  who  had  long  and 
much  experience  in  it.  (De  Horn.  leg.  5.  cons.  46.) 

"  Is  it  sometimes  lawful  to  procure  abortion  ? 

"  It  is  a  most  grievous  sin,  directly  and  intentionally  to 
procure  abortion,  whether  the  foetus  is  alive  or  not. 

"  Hence,  Innocent  XI.  justly  condemned  this  proposition, 
(No.  34.)  '  It  is  lawful  to  procure  abortion  before  the 
quickening  of  the  foetus,  lest  a  girl  found  pregnant  may  be 
put  to  death,  or  rendered  infamous.' 

"  Is  the  procuring  of  abortion  properly  called  homicide  ? 

"  Ans.  If  the  foetus  is  alive,  it  is  undoubtedly  homicide, 
properly  so  called,  and  indeed  so  much  the  more  severe,  be- 
cause it  is  destined  in  addition  eternally  to  destroy  the  soul 
of  the  infant.  Therefore,  the  person  procuring  such  an 
abortion  becomes  obnoxious  to  irregularity,  and  the  other 
penalties  of  homicide." 


OF  HOMICIDE.  283 

"  If  the  fcEtus  is  not  alive,  (which  is  always  uncertain,)  it 
is  not.  homicide,  properly  so  called,  but  only  by  way  of  in- 
ference, in  so  far  as  Tertullian  says  in  apolog.  ch.  3,  *  to 
hinder  from  being  born,  is  an  anticipation  of  homicide.' 
Hence,  the  person  procuring  such  an  abortion,  would  indeed 
commit  a  sin  similar  in  wickedness  to  homicide,  yet  he  would 
not  incur  the  penalties  of  homicide. 

"  Is  it  not  lawful  to  cause  abortion,  at  least  indirectly  ? 

"  Ordinarily,  he  sins  grievously,  who  does  that  from  which 
he  may  and  ought  foresee  that  abortion  will  follow,  although 
he  may  not  formally  intend  it,"&c.  A  mother  is  not  at 
liberty  to  take  medicine  to  procure  abortion,  even  if  the  death 
of  the  child  as  well  as  of  herself  appears  certain  unless  the 
remedy  is  applied. 

*'  But  what  if,  unless  a  medicine  be  taken,  the  mother  will 
certainly  die,  together  with  the  foetus,  and  without  baptism  ? 

"  In  this  speculative  case,  Steyaert  thinks  that  it  is  not  un- 
just, if  she  be  saved  who  can  be,  and  he  be  left  to  perish, 
who  would  have  perished  at  all  events. 

"  But  practically,  it  must  be  said  with  Daelman,  that  this 
supposition  can  scarcely  ever  be  true  :  for  it  will  not  be  clear, 
whether  even  if  the  mother  were  dead,  the  foetus  could  not 
be  cut  out  alive :  nor  can  it  certainly  be  known,  whether  the 
mother  might  not  have  survived  without  such  a  remedy,  as 
in  similar  cases  the  most  expert  physicians  may  often  be  de- 
ceived. Besides,  if  this  supposition  were  once  practically 
admitted,  a  risk  and  a  certainty  would  be  supposed,  which  do 
not  in  reality  exist,  and  thus  frequently  a  pretext  might  be 
given  for  expelling  the  foetus. 

"  Authors  agree,  however,  that  if  the  danger  to  the  foetus 
is  equal,  whether  the  remedy  be  taken  or  not,  then  it  is  pro- 
per for  the  mother  to  take  it :  because,  from  this,  greater 
danger  is  not  brought  upon  the  foetus,  and  care  is  taken  for 
the  life  of  the  mother. 

"  If  it  can  be  ascertained  that  the  foetus  is  not  alive,  and 
the  mother  will  die  unless  she  take  the  remedy,  then  it  is  ad- 
mitted that  the  mother  may  use  a  medicine  which  is  directly 
curative  of  the  mother,  and  in  itself  does  not  tend  to  abortion, 
although  there  may  be  danger  that  abortion  may  follow  from 
A,  provided  that  the  mother  cannot  be  saved  by  another  re- 
medy :  because  then  abortion  would  be  only  permitted,  not 


284  OF  HOMICIDE. 

procured.  Yet  if  danger  of  death  does  not  threaten  the  mo- 
ther from  the  natural  disease,  but  -from  another  source,  as 
for  instance,  because  it  is  foreseen  that  she  must  be  killed,  or 
that  she  will  die  in  labour,  then  she  may  not  by  any  means 
use  such  a  remedy. 

"  More  about  abortions,  and  the  mode  of  preventing,  espe- 
cially voluntary  ones,  may  be  seen  in  the  celebrated  Cangi- 
amila,  in  his  Sacred  Embryology."  (! !) 

Concerning  the  punishments  of  those  who  procure  abortion. 
(135.) 
"  It  is  to  be  premised,  that  to  procure  abortion,  is,  by  de- 
sign and  intention,  to  effect  by  one's  self,  or  by  another,  that 
the  foetus  be  prematurely  expelleS  from  the  womb  :  and  hence 
it  is  not  called  simply  a  procuring  of  abortion,  if  it  is  casual 
or  only  indirectly  voluntary  in  the  remote  cause,  to  which 
the  effect  is  joined  by  accident ;  but  it  is  requisite  that  abor- 
tion be  intended,  either  as  the  means,  or  as  the  end,  at  least 
as  much  as  it  is  from  the  nature  of  the  action. 

*  *  '  *  *  *  * 

"  What  punishments  do  they  incur,  who  procure  abortion? 

"  Those  who  cause  abortion  only  indirectly,  by  not  for 
mally  intending  it,  do  not  seem  to  incur  the  penalties  ap 
pointed  for  those  who  procure  abortion,  because  to  procure 
as  was  said  above,  means  studiously  and  intentionally  to  ef- 
fect that  the  fcetus  be  prematurely  expelled. 

"SixtusV.,  in  the  Bull  Effrenatam,  Oct.  29,  1588, 
decrees  that  all  who  procure  the  abortion  of  a  foetus,  whether 
living  or  dead,  this  effect  having  followed,  also  those  who 
drink  potions  to  produce  sterility,  or  who  have  afforded  any 
hindrance  to  the  conception  of  the  foetus,  or  in  any  way  have 
given  advice  or  aid  to  them,  incur  all  the  penalties,  provided 
in  every  law  against  voluntary  homicides ;  and  besides,  sub- 
jects the  same,  from  the  very  fact,  to  irregularity  and  excom- 
munication, reserved  to  the  Supreme  Pontiff,  excepting  the 
article  of  death  :  he  also  deprives  them  of  offices  and  bene- 
fices, and  disqualifies  them  from  holding  them  ever  after- 
wards. 

"This  Bull  of  SixtusV.,  Gregory  XIV.  modified,  in  the 
Bull,  Sedes  Apostolica,  given  May  31,  1591,  and  re- 
stricted the  said  penalties  of  irregularity,  excommunication, 


OF  HOMICIDE.  285 

and  the  others  passed  by  Sixtus,  to  those  only,  who  procure 
the  abortion  of  a  living  foetus,  or  in  any  way  whatever  have 
given  assistance  or  advice  to  them  :  besides,  he  declares  that 
the  bishop,  and  any  confessor  whatsoever,  deputed  by  the 
bishop  for  this  special  case,  may  absolve  from  this  case  and 
the  annexed  censure,  &c. 

"  Authors  remark,  that  as  in  the  Bull  of  Sixtus  V.,  it  is 
said,  the  effect  having  followed,  he  does  not  incur  said  penal- 
ties, who  has  endeavoured  to  procure  abortion,  or  to  induce 
to  abortion,  if  that  effect  has  not  followed. 

"  The  civil  laws  appoint  for  abortion  before  the  quickening 
of  the  foetus,  the  punishment  of  exile  for  the  woman,  after 
quickening,  the  punishment  of  death,  &c. 

"  What  things  are  to  be  observed  relative  to  the  confession 
and  absolution  of  one  who  has  procured  abortion? 

"  Ans.  1st.  The  quality  of  the  person  is  to  be  asked,  who 
has  procured  abortion  in  herself  or  in  another. 

"  2.  The  quality  and  number  of  the  persons  by  whom  the 
abortion  has  been  procured  :  because  perhaps  they  are  im- 
plicated in  the  nefarious  scandal. 

"  3.  For  how  long  a  time  they  have  intended  the  abortion, 
because  such  crimes  are  not  usually  committed,  except  through 
a  long  course  of  time,  during  which  very  many  crimes  are 
performed,  on  account  of  different  and  intervening  intentions 
of  the  same  crime,  on  account  of  repeated  attempts,  &c. 

"  Concerning  absolution,  it  must  be  ascertained,  1st.  Whe- 
ther excommunication  has  been  incurred. 

"  2.  Whether  proximate  occasions  of  sins,  which  are  al- 
most connected  with  this  sin,  have  been  afforded,  as  incest, 
sacrilege,  concubinage,  &c. ;  for  those  who  procure  abortion 
are  generally  obnoxious  to  these  crimes. 

"  3.  Whether  he  has  made  satisfaction,  or  is  at  least  pre- 
pared to  make  satisfaction  for  the  losses  which  have  followed 
by  reason  of  the  abortion  :  for  instance,  that  an  inheritance 
must  on  this  account  pass  over  to  another  family. 

"  Akin  to  abortion  is  the  overlaying  of  children,  (a  re- 
served case  in  various  dioceses,)  which  is  a  species  of  homi- 
cide or  parricide  by  which  some  one  suffocates  children,  or 
in  any  way  kills  them,  either  altogether  voluntarily  and  di- 
rectly, or  casually  and  in  consequence  of  smothering,  as  is 
usually  done,  v.  g.,  when  they  place  infants  of  a  very  ten- 
21^ 


286  OF  HOMICIDE. 

der  age  with  them  in  the  same  bed  ;  such  persons  cannot 
regularly  be  excused  from  mortal  sin  on  account  of  the  dan- 
ger of  smothering,  &c.  &c. 

"  Is  it  lawful  to  cut  open  a  living  mother,  in  order  that  off- 
spring may  be  baptized,  which  would  otherwise  die  without 
baptism  ? 

"  If  this  operation  cannot  be  done  with  a  well-founded 
hope  of  preserving  the  mother  aUve,  (which  hope  is  some- 
times believed  to  exist,  as  may  be  seen  in  Cangiamila  above 
cited,)  it  is  unlawful,  whatever  might  be  hoped  concerning 
the  preservation  of  the  offspring ;  for  although  the  mother 
ought  to  expose  her  own  life  for  the  preservation  of  her  child, 
her  life  may  not  for  this  reason  be  taken  from  her,  nor  should 
she  therefore  herself  consent  that  it  should  be  taken  away. 

"  But  if  a  pregnant  mother  dies,  this  operation 
not  only  may,  but  ought  to  be  performed,  and  in- 
deed by  the  priest,  in  the  absence  of  a  surgeon  and 
other  skilful  persons,  in  order  that  the  child  may 
be  baptized. 

"  Is  it  lawful  to  throw  a  boy  into  the  river  that  he  may  be 
baptized,  if  he  cannot  otherwise  be  baptized  ? 

"  No :  because  this  throwing,  as  is  supposed,  is  in  itself 
destructive  of  the  child,  and  the  good  effect,  namely,  the 
baptism  of  the  child,  follows  only  mediately  from  it,  if  the 
forni  and  intention  of  baptism  are  doubtless  present,  where- 
as the  bad  effect,  namely,  the  killing,  follows  immediately. 

"  Besides,  it  is  disputed  whether  such  baptism  is  valid ; 
which  question,  see  No.  8,  concerning  the  Sacrament  of  Bap- 
tism." 

Concerning  Whipping  and  Imprisonment,     (137.) 

" Is  it  lawful  to  whip  any  one? 

"  Ans.  St.  Thomas,  art.  2.  in  corp.,  replies,  '  It  is  not 
lawful,  except  by  way  of  punishment,  on  account  of  justice; 
but  no  one  justly  punishes  another,  unless  he  is  subject  to 
his  jurisdiction  ;  and  therefore  it  is  not  lawful  to  whip  any 
one,  except  for  him  who  has  some  authority  over  him  whom 
he  whips.' 

"  Thus,  for  the  sake  of  reproof  and  discipline,  a  father 
can  lawfully  whip  a  child  ;  the  same  is  the  case  with  a  mas- 


OF  HOMICIDE.  287 

ter  and  a  tutor,  and  with  others  who  sustain  the  place  of  a 
father,  or  any  one  else  having  similar  authority. 

"  Is  it  lawful  for  a  husband  to  whip  his  wife? 

"  The  Germans  and  the  rougher  sort  of  our  own  country 
gladly  embrace  and  practise  the  affirmative.  As  for  mode- 
rate WHIPPING  IT  MAY  BE  PERMITTED,  IP  THE  WIFE  IS 
MUCH  IN  FAULT,  AND  THERE    IS    NO    HOPE    THAT    SHE    MAY 

BE  CORRECTED  IN  ANY  OTHER  WAY :  but  this  case  is  vopy 
rare ;  and  hence  the  French  and  the  more  polished  of  our 
own  country  regard  it  as  barbarous  to  whip  a  wife ;  but  the 
remark  of  a  letter  among  the  works  of  St.  Bernard  pleases 
them  better ;  *  You  will  chastise  a  bad  wife  with  ridicule  more 
effectually  than  with  a  stick  ;'  the  reason  is,  because  the  wife 
is  not  the  slave  of  the  man,  but  his  companion,  and  one 
flesh  with  him. 

"  Is  it  lawful  to  imprison  any  one  ? 

"St.  Thomas,  art.  3.  in  corp.,  replies:  'To  imprison,  or 
in  any  way  whatever  detain  any  one  is  unlawful,  unless  it 
be  done  according  to  the  order  of  justice,  or  as  a  punishment^ 
or  as  a  caution  for  avoiding  some  harm.' 

"Although  parents  may  not  justly  imprison  children,  they 
may  yet,  for  a  time,  shut  them  up  at  home,  for  the  sake  of 
discipline,"  &c. 

Concerning  the  Confessor  of  a  Homicide.     (141.) 

"How  must  the  confessor  treat  a" homicide  in  the  tribunal 
of  penance  1 

^^  Ans.  1.  Let  him  ask  him,  for  what  cause  or  end  the 
homicide  has  been  committed ;  whether  on  account  of  the 
just  defence  of  life,  by  preserving  the  moderation  of  blame- 
less defence,  or  by  not  preserving  it,  &c. 

"  2.  Whether  he  killed  the  person  from  sudden  passion, 
or  from  inveterate  hatred,  at  the  same  time  questioning  about 
the  time  during  which  this  hatred  has  lasted,  how  often  it  has 
been  renewed,  &c. 

"  3.  Whether  no  blasphemies,  reproaches,  or  curses  have 
preceded ;  also,  whether  he  has  perpetrated  cruelty  or  pollu- 
tion on  the  body  of  the  slain  person. 

"  4.  Whether  it  was  directly  voluntary  ;  in  which  event 
it  is  at  the  same  time  a  reserved  case. 


288  OF  SEDUCTION. 

"  5.  What  means  he  employed,  whether  he  has  killed  by- 
treachery  and  stratagem,  by  a  quick  or  slow  poison ;  which 
chiefly  takes  place  with  female  homicides :  whether  he  has 
employed  associates ;  for  he  has  besides  committed  just  so 
many  sins  of  scandal  as  he  has  employed  associates. 

"  6.  The  quality  of  the  person  slain  is  to  be  asked :  v.  g. 
if  he  is  a  near  relation,  allied  by  the  same  blood,  it  is  parri- 
cide ;  if  a  clergyman,  it  is  sacrilege ;  and  it  has  the  annexed 
greater  excommunication  reserved  to  the  Supreme  Pontiff. 

"  Finally,  let  the  confessor  inquire  the  injuries  caused, 
&c.,  that  he  may  enjoin  due  restitution. 

"  These  things  having  been  duly  examined,  let  the  con- 
fessor of  the  homicide  set  before  him  the  grievousness  of  his 
crime:  also,  the  penalties,  both  civil  and  ecclesiastical,  to 
which  he  has  made  himself  obnoxious,  and  induce  him  to 
conceive  contrition  worthy  of  such  a  crime,  and  having  im- 
posed  a  salutary  penance  (especially  one,  which  may  last 

long,  &C.)  HE  MAY  ABSOLVE  HIM  WHEN  RIGHTLY  DISPOSED, 

if  he  has  authority  to  absolve  from  this  crime^^^  &c. 

The  sections  from  142-150,  treat  of  seduction,  fornica- 
tion, and  adultery,  and  the  restitution  which  is  due  in  the 
different  aspects  which  such  cases  may  present.  I  must  be 
excused  from  translating  them  all  in  detail.  The  following 
are  a  k\v  of  the  principles,  which  are  inculcated. 

Concerning   restitution  for   seduction,  if  the   virgin  has 
freely  consented.    (143.) 

"  If  the  virgin  and  her  parents  freely  give  their  consent, 
&c.,  the  seducer  is  under  no  obligation  to  make  restitution 
to  them  :  because,  on  the  supposition  even  that  they  cannot 
waive  their  right,  they  can  certainly  waive  their  right  to 
restitution  ;  and  this  they  are  regarded  as  yielding  by  afford- 
ing their  consent. 

"  If  the  virgin  consents,  but  the  parents  are  unwilling,  or 
ignorant;  then  if  the  intercourse  remains  secret,  the  seducer 
is  again  under  no  obligation  to  make  restitution. 

"  If  it  becomes  known  to  the  parents  only,  he  is  bound  to 
make  satisfaction  for  the  sorrow  he  has  unjustly  occasioned 
them  by  asking  pardon,  by  the  exhibition  of  respect, 
&c. 


OF  SEDUCTION.  289 

"  But  if  it  is  widely  divulged,  he  is  besides  obliged  to  bear 
and  put  a  stop  to  the  infamy  in  the  best  way  he  can. 

"Observe,  parents  are  to  be  regarded  as  unwilling,  not 
only  when  they  positively  resist,  but  also  when  they  are 
ignorant  of  the  fact,  unless,  indeed,  they  knowingly  neglect 
the  proximate  danger  of  the  seduction  being  effected ;  for 
instance,  when  they  permit  their  daughter  to  engage  in 
familiar  conversation  with  an  immodest  young  man. 

"  In  case  that  the  parents  do  not  consent,  is  the  seducer 
bound  to  an  increase  of  the  dowry,  which  the  parents  are 
now  obliged  to  make  greater,  in  order  that  their  daughter 
may  contract  a  suitable  marriage? 

"  Authors  are  divided :  those  who  maintain  the  affirma- 
tive, say  that,  not  only  has  the  daughter  a  right  to  contract 
a  suitable  marriage,  but  the  parents  also :  those  who  main- 
tain the  negative,  say  that  parents  have  no  such  right,  ex- 
cept dependently  upon  the  right  and  will  of  the  daughter, 
who,  if  she  chooses,  may,  without  injury  to  her  parents, 
remain  unmarried,  or  unite  herself  with  one,  who  is  her 
inferior  in  rank. 

"  Practically  on  account  of  the  probability  of  both  opin- 
ions, the  seducer  appears  obliged  to  some  augmentation  of 
the  dowry,,  according  to  the  arbitration  of  a  prudent  man ; 
especially  if  he  is  rich,  and  she  is  poorer ;  and  this  certainly 
by  the  law  of  charity,  if  the  seduced,  on  account  of  the  loss 
of  her  virginity,  and  the  want  of  dowry,  is  in  danger  of 
prostituting  herself:  for  as  the  seducer  is  also  to  blame,  he 
is  bound  to  guard  against  these  evils :  and  this  confessors 
should  observe,  as  Wiggers  admonishes ;  otherwise  sedu- 
cers may  not  readily  be  absolved,  say  De  Cocq  and  Braun- 
man." 

What  restitution  is  he  obliged  to  make,  who  has  seduced 
by  force  or  fra  udl   (144.) 

"  He  is  bound  to  repair  all  losses  and  evils  that  have  fol- 
lowed ;  as  he  is  the  true  and  unjust  cause  of  them  all. 

"  He  is  under  obligation  to  repair  the  personal  injury,  &c. 
if  the  virgin  requires  it,  &c. 

"  3.  He  is  obliged  to  make .  honorary  satisfaction,  both  to 
the  parents  and  the  virgin,  by  asking  pardon,  &c. 


290  OF  SEDUCTION. 

^'  4.  If  the  injuries  cannot  be  repaired  except  by  marry- 
ing the  seduced,  the  corrupter  is  bound  to  marry  her  even 
before  the  sentence  of  the  judge:  but  if  she  refuses  mar- 
riage, the  seducer  is  under  obligation  to  compensate  all 
injuries  in  so  far  as  it  can  be  done. 

"  5.  If  the  seduced  marries  another,  who  treats  her  badly, 
dismisses  her,  &c.,  on  account  of  her  lost  virginity,  the 
seducer  is  again  bound  to  compensate  those  losses  and  evils 
according  to  the  judgment  of  a  prudent  man. 

"  Precisely,  the  same  things  are  to  be  said  of  him,  who, 
indeed,  does  not  seduce  a  virgin,  but  has  done  such  things 
from  which  she  is  believed  to  be  seduced ;  even  if  the  girl 
was  not  a  virgin,  but  was  only  considered  such  before," 
&c.,  &c. 

If  the  seduction  has  been  effected  through  a  real  promise 
of  marriage,  or  through  feigned  marriage,  he  is  obliged 
promptly  to  fulfil  his  engagement,  and  is  forbidden  to  enter 
any  religious  order,  which  would  require  celibacy,  unless 
the  injured  party  is  willing. 

The  case  is  different,  1.  If  the  seduced  commits  sin  against 
chastity  with  another.  2.  If  she  has  pretended  to  be  a  vir- 
gin, or  noble,  &c.  3.  If  the  promise  of  marriage  was  made 
in  such  a  way  that  she  might  know  it  was  only  feigned ;  for 
instance,  from  threats,  exaggerations,  inconstancy,  ambiguity 
of  language,  or  great  disparity  of- rank:  because  in  such 
circumstances,  the  girl  is  regarded  not  as  being  deceived, 
but  as  having  deceived  herself.  4.  If  the  girl  will  not  marry 
him,  or  her  parents  are  unwilling  to  give  her  up  to  the 
seducer.  5.  If  greater  evils  may  prudently  be  apprehended 
from  the  marriage,  as  serious  quarrels  between  families,  dis- 
inheritings,  grievous  scandal,  &c.  6.  If  a  hindrance  from 
which  no  dispensation  can  be  obtained  supervenes ;  as,  if  the 
seducer  has  contracted  with  another,  has  solemnly  made 
profession,  &c.  The  seducer  is  bound  to  remove  every  im- 
pediment which  is  morally  removable.  In  all  these  cases, 
the  seducer  is  not  only  obliged  to  marry  the  girl,  but  in  the 
first  three,  he  is  ordinarily  not  obliged  to  repair  the  injury 
done  to  her,  "  nor  as  it  seems  in  the  fourth,"  &c. 


OF  SEDUCTION.  291 

Concerning  the  Confessor  of  a  Seducer  or  Fornicator, 
(No.  147.) 

The  confessor  is  directed  to  inquire,  after  hearing  of  the 
illicit  intercourse : 

"  1.  Whether  offspring  has  followed  or  will  follow ;  if  it 
be  said  that  it  neither  has  followed  nor  will  follow,  then  let 
it  be  prudently  and  circumspectly  asked,  whence  he  knows 
it;  in  order  that  if  perchance  abortion  has  been  procured, 
the  penitent  may  tell  it ;  and  if  it  has  not  been  procured,  that 
he  may  not  learn  to  do  it. 

"  But  if  it  be  ascertained  that  offspring  has  followed  or 
will  follow ;  let  the  penitent  be  instructed  concerning  the  ob- 
ligation of  maintaining  it  when  it  has  followed  ;  but  concern- 
ing that  which  is  likely  to  follow,  he  must  be  prudently  and 
strongly  admonished,  to  take  care  that  no  injury  may  hap- 
pen to  the  foetus,  but  that  it  may  be  brought  safe  to  light,  and 
that  provision  may  be  seasonably  made  for  its  baptism.  He 
is  also  to  be  admonished  that  the  child,  when  born,  be  not 
exposed  or  otherwise  neglected ;  also  that  it  be  legitimated, 
if  it  can  be  done,  and  greater  evils  are  not  in  the  way. 

"  2.  Let  the  confessor  inquire  whether  he  has  induced  the 
woman  by  force,  or  fraud,  or  importunities  equivalent  to 
force ;  whether  under  promise  of  marriage :  let  him  also 
show  the  obligations  with  regard  to  the  seduced,  as  it  has 
been  explained  in  preceding  numbers. 

"  Let  the  confessor  also  reflect  that  it  often  happens  that 
ofTspring  does  not  ensue,  because  conception  is  hindered  by 
the  sin  of  Onan,  &c. 

"  Concerning  dissolute  young  men,  it  is  also  to  be  consid- 
ered whether  they  do  not  belong  to  those  abandoned  charac- 
ters, who,  when  they  have  secretly  seduced  a  girl,  openly 
boast  of  the  fact  among  their  associates,  and  thus  deprive 
the  deceived  of  all  honour  and  reputation  by  their  nefarious 
detraction. 

"  Likewise  concerning  immodest  women,  it  should  be  ob- 
served that  they  sometimes  abuse  young  men  of  a  tender 
age,  and  often  ignorant,  for  purposes  of  lust,  by  force,  de- 
ceit, or  fraud ;  and  these,  without  doubt,  are  guilty  of  seduc- 
tion, the  most  grievous  scandal,  &c. 


292  VIRTUE  OF  RELIGION. 

"  3.  Generally,  in  all  sins  of  licentiousness,  the  circum- 
stances are  to  be  asked  both  of  the  person  confessing,  and 
of  the  person  with  whom,  or  about  whom  the  sin  has  been 
committed  ;  whether  she  is  single,  married,  bound  by  a  vow, 
a  relative,  &c. 

"  4.  As  for  external  sins  of  licentiousness  between  two 
persons,  the  confessor  ought  to  ask,  whether  those  persons 
live  together  in  the  same  house:  because  when  once  the 
sense  of  shame  is  taken  away,  such  dwelling  together  is 
most  dangerous  ;  and  therefore,  ordinarily,  they  should,  with- 
out dissimulation,  be  separated.  Farther,  it  should  then  be 
asked,  how  long  they  have  thus  lived  together,  what  sacra- 
ments they  have  frequented,  &c. ;  as  is  taught  more  at  large 
in  the  Treatise  concerning  Penance." 

The  chapters  which  treat  of  the  injury  and  restitution  due 
in  case  of  adultery,  and  the  manner  of  making  such  restitu- 
tion, I  decline  translating. 

The  Treatise  concerning  Contracts,  which  constitutes  the 
remainder  of  the  3d  volume,  contains  nothing  of  special  in- 
terest to  the  general  reader. 


CHAPTER  XXVIII. 

Vol.  IV.  commences  with  a  Treatise  on  the  Virtue  of  Re- 
ligion. 

"  Religion  is  defined  as  a  virtue  exhibiting  the  worship 
due  to  God,  as  the  fast  principle  of  all  things.  It  is  also 
rightly  defined  by  others,  a  virtue  inclining  the  will  to 
pay  the  worship  of  latria  due  to  God.  Religion  is  a  super- 
natural virtue  connected  with  charity,"  &c. 

At  the  close  of  No.  3.  the  following  question,  is  asked. 

"  How  can  all  the  worship  of  religion  be  said  to  be  due 
to  God,  when  there  are  works  of  supererogation,  by  which 
God  is  worshipped ;  suppose  the  vow  of  chastity  ? 

"  I  answer  with  Wiggers,  that  all  our  works  are  rightly 


OF  PRAYER.^  293 

said  to  be  due  to  God ;  because  we  are  in  every  way  the  ser- 
vants of  God ;  yet  as  God  does  not  exact  all  these  works, 
as  to  the  exercise  of  the  act,  as  though  due  by  a  special  pre- 
cept, in  this  sense,  some  are  called  works  of  supererogation ; 
for  there  are  no  works  of  pure  liberality  in  man  with  respect 
to  God.  Besides,  this  worship  is  said  to  be  due  to  God,  be- 
cause it  is  due,  or  can  be  paid  to  no  other." 

No.  12  treats  of  the  necessity  of  prayer  to  salvation. 

No.  13.  Of  the  'precept  of  prayer. 

"  Is  there  a  command  to  pray  ? 

"  St.  Thomas  teaches  the  affirmative  answer,  q.  83.  art. 
2.,  &c.,  saying, — '  To  ask  (or  pray)  falls  under  a  precept 
of  religion,  which  precept  is  plainly  enjoined,'  John  xvi.  24, 
where  it  is  said,  Ask  and  ye  shall  receive.  The  catechism 
of  the  Council  of  Trent  teaches  the  same.  But  this  precept 
is  divine  and  natural. 

"  When  is  the  precept  of  praying  obligatory  1 

"  Ans.  Wiggers,  Sylvius,  Layman,  and  other  scholastics 
enumerate  many  occasions  in  which  the  precept  of  prayer 
is  obligatory,  either  in  itself  or  by  some  circumstance  ac- 
cording to  the  ordinary  laws  of  God  ;  namely, 

"1.  About  the  beginning  of  the  use  of  reason.-  Thus 
Wiggers,  Boudart,  &c.,  teach. 

"  2.  In  danger  of  death.     Sylv.,  Boud.,  Laym.,  Bee. 

"  3.  In  grievous  temptation.     Wigg.,  Boud.,  Van  Roy. 

"  4.  When  it  is  necessary  to  begin  some  arduous  work. 
Sylv, 

"  5.  When  the  sinner  is  obliged  to  prepare  himself  for  a 
state  of  grace ;  or  when  some  sacrament  is  to  be  received  or 
administered.     Wigg. 

'*  6.  In  any  necessity  of  the  church,  state,  or  community. 
Wigg.,  Laym. 

"  7.  Also  in  our  own  necessity  or  danger,  or  in  that  of 
our  neighbour,  especially  in  spiritual,  according  to  the  rule 
by  which  charity  obliges ;  when,  indeed,  prayer  will  appear 
to  be  a  very  convenient  means  of  obviating  the  necessity. 
Less.,  Laym.,  and  St.  Thorn.,  &c. 

"  8.  That  the  precept  of  prayer  is  obligatory  on  festival 
days,  St.  Thomas  indicates  in  the  passage  already  cited,  say- 
ing :  *  The  appointed  time  of  prayer  seems  determined  by 
the  church  for  all  people ;  as  by  the  statute  of  the  canons 
25 


294  ^OF  PRAYER. 

they  are  obliged  on  festival  days  to  be  present  in  the  divine 
services,  especially  in  the  sacrifice  of  the  mass,  that  they 
may  conform  their  intention  to  the  ministers  praying  for  the 
people. 

"  It  ought  to  be  observed  that  not  every  defect  of  prayer 
induces  mortal  sin,  &c." 

From  No.  16  to  No.  24,  the  Lord's  prayer  is  explained 
and  discussed. 

No.  25.  Concerning  the  angelic  salutation. 

"Hail  Mary,  full  of  grace,  &c. 

**  The  pious  devotion  of  the  faithful  from  the  most  ancient 
custom  of  the  church  in  its  infancy,  observes,  that  after  the 
Lord's  prayer,  the  angelic  salutation  be  recited,  that  through 
the  intercession  of  the  Blessed  Virgin  Mary,  we  may  obtain 
what  we  ask  from  God  :  for  she,  next  to  Christ,  is  our  hope. 

"  The  angelic  salutation  consists  of  three  parts  :  the  first 
part  contains  the  salutation  of  the  archangel  Gabriel ;  the  se- 
cond, the  words  of  St.  Elizabeth  to  Mary,  spoken  by  the  in- 
spiration of  the  Holy  Spirit ;  the  third  part  contains  the 
prayer  of  the  church,  invoking  the  patronage  of  the  Virgin 
Mother  of  God  :  but  this  part  is  believed  to  have  been  added 
in  the  5th  cent.,  against  the  heresy  of  Nestorius,  who  denied 
that  Mary  was  to  be  called  Deipara,  or  the  Mother  of  God. 

"  Marchantius,  in  the  Hortus  Pastorum,  book  2,  de  Spe., 
Tract.  4,  furnishes  a  more  ample  explanation  of  the  angelic 
salutation,  for  the  use  of  preachers." 

No.  26.  Concerning  the  Rosary. 

"  From  the  Lord's  prayer  and  the  angelic  salutation,  is 
framed  the  celebrated  form  of  prayer,  approved  by  the  church, 
which  is  called  the  Rosary,  containing  fifteen  decades  of  an- 
gelic salutations,  fifteen  Lord's  prayers  intervening,  in  which 
are  called  to  mind  the  principal  mysteries  of  the  life,  death, 
and  resurrection  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ. 

"  In  this  Rosary,  the  fifteen  mysteries  are  disposed  in  this 
order :  that  first,  the  five  joyful  mysteries  may  be  remem- 
bered, viz:  1.  The  annunciation  of  the  Blessed  Vir.  Mary; 
2,  the  visitation;  3,  the  nativity  of  Christ;  4,  Jesus  pre- 


OF  PRAYER.  295 

sented  in  the  temple  at  the  feast  of  the  purification  of  the  B. 
M.  v.,  (i.  e.,  the  Blessed  Virgin  Mary,) ;  5,  Jesus  found  in 
the  temple. 

"  Five  dolorous  mysteries  follow ;  1.  The  sorrow  of  Christ 
in  the  garden;  2,  his  scourging;  3,  his  crowning  with 
thorns  ;  4,  the  bearing  of  the  cross  ;  5,  the  crucifixion. 

"  Five  glorious  mysteries  are  added  :  1.  The  resurrection 
of  the  Lord ;  2,  his  ascension ;  3,  the  advent  of  the  Holy 
Spirit ;  4,  the  assumption  of  B.  M.  V. ;  5,  the  coronation 
of  the  Blessed  Virgin  Mary,  in  heaven. 

"  It  is  proper,  in  catechisms  and  sermons,  to  teach  tlie 
faithful  these  mysteries  of  the  Rosary,  because  they  contain 
an  idea  of  the  life  of  Christ. 

"  The  practice  of  reciting  the  Rosary,  is  that  the  person 
praying  in  the  recitation  of  each  decade  represents  to  him- 
self one  of  these  mysteries,  and  bows  his  head  at  the  names 
of  Mary  and  Jesus,  and  salutes  the  same  as  though  repre- 
sented and  formerly  constituted  in  such  mystery." 

No.  27.  Concerning  Litanies. 

"  St.  Gregory  encouraged  the  use  of  the  litanies  of  all 
saints:  which  form  of  praying  had  been  practised  in  the 
church  long  before  him,  &c. 

"  The  litanies  of  the  B.  M.  V.  of  Loretto,  were  approved 
in  subsequent  periods,  by  the  custom  of  the  church,  and  the 
authority  of  the  Popes,  in  which  the  B.  Virgin  Mary  is  called 
by  various  peculiar  and  metaphorical  names,  in  order  that 
prayer  to  her  at  any  time  may  be  protracted  without  weari- 
ness. 

"Observe,  that  these  two  litanies  alone  have  been  ap- 
proved by  the  church  as  public  prayers :  and  hence  these 
two  only  may  be  publicly  sung  in  the  divine  service,  accord- 
ing to  the  decree  of  Clement  VIII.,  and  the  declaration  of  the 
S.  Congreg.  Rit.  in  Alexand.,  May  15,  1608. 

"  Yet  in  this  general  prohibition,  the  litanies  approved  by 
the  Apostolic  See  do  not  seem  to  be  included,  such  as  it  is 
commonly  affirmed  the  litanies  of  the  holy  name  of  Jesus 
are,  from  the  circumstance  that  Sixtus  V.  Const.  Reddituri 
has  conceded  300  days  of  indulgence  to  those  who  recite 
them,  as  Luc.  Ferrarj*  remarks  after  others  in,  &c.,  &c. 


296 


OF  PRAYER. 


"  It  would  appear  that  litanies,  which  are  everywhere 
found  in  prayer-books,  approved  by  the  censor,  may  be  re- 
cited by  private  persons."* 

*  The  following  is  the  litany  of  the  Blessed  Virgin,  as  furnished  on 
p.  128  of  the  Catholic  Companion,  published  with  the  approbation  of 
the  Right  Rev.  Dr.  Kenrick. 

THE  LITANY    OP  THE  BLESSED  VIRGIN. 
ANTHEM. 

We  fly  to  thy  patronage,  O  holy  mother  of  God !  despise  not  our 
petitions  in  our  necessities,  but  deliver  us  from  all  dangers,  O  ever 
glorious  and  blessed  Virgin  I 
'Lord  have  mercy  on  us, 
Christ  have  mercy  on  us. 
Lord  have  mercy  on  us, 
Christ  hear  us, 
Christ  graciously  hear  us, 
God  the  Father  of  Heaven,  have  mercy  on  us, 
God  the  Son,  Redeemer  of  the  world,  have  mercy  on  us, 
God  the  Holy  Ghost,  have  mercy  on  us. 
Holy  Trinity,  one  God,  have  mercy  on  us. 

Holy  Mary, 

Holy  Mother  of  God, 

Holy  Virgin  of  Virgins, 

Mother  of  Christ, 

Mother  of  divine  grace. 

Mother  most  pure. 

Mother  most  chaste, 

Mother  undefiled, 

Mother  unviolated, 

Mother  most  amiable. 

Mother  most  admirable. 

Mother  of  our  Creator, 

Mother  of  our  Redeemer, 

Virgin  most  prudent, 

Virgin  most  venerable. 

Virgin  most  renowned. 

Virgin  most  powerful. 

Virgin  most  merciful. 

Virgin  most  faithful, 

Mirror  of  justice. 

Seat  of  wisdom. 

Cause  of  our  joy, 

Spiritual  vessel. 

Vessel  of  honour. 

Vessel  of  singular  devotion, 

Mystical  rose,  ^ 

Tower  of  David, 


OF  PRAYER. 


297 


No.  28.  Concerning  canonical  hours, 

"  What  are  canonical  hours  ? 

*'  Ans.  They  are  vocal  prayers,  ordained  and  prescribed 
by  the  church,  to  be  spoken  or  sung  daily,  at  certain  hours. 

"  They  are  called  prayers,  in  a  wide  sense,  because  the 
greater  part  consists  of  prayers :  they  are  called  hours,  be- 
cause they  are  to  be  recited  at  certain  hours  of  the  day :  also, 
canonical,  because  most  have  been  prescribed  by  canons  : 
they  are  called  also,  divine  or  ecclesiastical  service,  because 
they  have  been  instituted  for  the  worship  of  God,  and  are 
performed  in  the  name  of  the  church. 

"  This  service  is  composed  of  psalms,  lessons,  hymns,  &;c., 
in  pleasant  variety ;  all  which  are  ordained  for  the  worship 
of  God ;  thus,  therefore,  the  recitation  of  the  hours  is  an  act 
of  the  virtue  of  religion;  but  it  contains  various  acts  of  re- 
ligion, prayers,  the  praises  of  God,  returning  of  thanks,  &c., 
as  also  various  acts  of  other  virtues,  faith,  hope,  charity,  obe- 
dience, penitence,  dulia,  (i.  e.,  worship  of  saints,  &c.),  &c. 

"  How  many  canonical  hours  are  there  ? 

"  Seven  are  commonly  enumerated,  conformably  to  that 
saying  of  David,  Ps.  118,  164.  'Seven  times  a  day,  I  have 
given  praise  to  thee ;'  the  names  of  which  are  derived  from 
the  hours  in  which  they  are  usually  recited,  namely,  the 
matin  with  praises,  first,  third,  sixth,  ninth,  vespers  and  the 


25* 


Tower  of  ivory, 

House  of  gold, 

Ark  of  the  covenant, 

Gate  of  heaven, 

Morning  star, 

Health  of  the  weak, 

Refuge  of  sinners, 

Comforter  of  the  afflicted, 

Help  of  Christians, 

Queen  of  Angels, 

Queen  of  Patriarchs, 

Queen  of  Prophets, 

Queen  of  Apostles, 

Queen  of  Martyrs, 

Queen  of  Confessors, 

Queen  of  Virgins, 

Queen  of  All  Saints,  &c.,  &c.    , 


998'  *  OF  PRAYER. 

completorium.     But  they  are  adapted  to  the  mysteries  of  the 
passion  of  Christ,  according  to  these  verses : 

Matutina  ligat  Christum,  qui  crimina  solvit : 

Prima  replet  sputis,  causam  dat  Tertia  mortis  ; 

Sexta  cruci  nectit ;  latus  egus  nona  bipertit ; 

Vespera  deponit ;  tumulo  Completa  reponit. 

The  matin  binds  Christ,  who  absolves  from  sins. 

The  first  covers  him  with  spittle ;  the  third  gives  the  cause  of  his 
death. 

The  sixth  binds  him  to  the  cross ;  the  ninth  pierces  his  side. 

The  vesper  takes  him  down ;  the  completa  lays  him  in  the  tomb. 
"  That  certain  hours  of  prayers  were  observed  from  the 
time  of  the  Apostles,  the  Sacred  Writings  show,  Acts  iii.  1. 
*  Now  Peter  and  John  went  up  to  the  temple,  at  the  ninth 
hour  of  prayer ;'  and  x.  9.  '  And  on  the  next  day  Peter 
went  up  to  the  higher  parts  of  the  house  to  pray  about  the 
sixth  hour.' " 

From  the  29th  No.  we  learn  that  they  who  are  initiated 
in  Sacred  Orders  are  obliged  to  recite  the  Canonical  hours. 

"  The  Clergy  of  the  first  Tonsure,  or  of  the  lower  orders 
are  in  our  day  not  under  obligation :  but  whoever  contends 
with  Huygens  that  they  were  formerly  bound  by  this  obliga- 
tion, ought  certainly  to  admit  that  it  has  ceased  through  con- 
trary custom,  so  that  they  are  not  even  obliged  to  recite  the 
office  of  the  B.  M.  V.  nor  the  penitential  psalms,  if  we  re- 
gard positive,  ecclesiastical  law." 

Concerning  the  obligation  of  Religious  orders  to  observe 
the  Canonical  hours.   (30.) 

"  The  Religious  of  both  sexes,  who  have  by  profession 
attached  themselves  to  the  choir  are  obliged  to  observe  the 
Canonical  hours,  so  that  if  they  have  been  absent  from  the 
choir,  they  are  bound  to  recite  them  privately.  This  obliga- 
tion is  founded  more  upon  the  generally  received  custom  of 
the  church  than  on  the  decrees  of  Canons.  Neither  the 
Novitii,  nor  the  Conversi,  nor  Brethren,  as  they  are  called, 
are  under  this  obligation  ;  nor  the  Religious  of  the  Society 
of  Jesus  (Jesuits),  nor  the  Hospitalarii,  nor  the  Militares,  &c. 
because  they  have  never  by  profession  attached  themselves 
to  a  choir. 


CANONICAL  HOURS.  299 

The  obligation  whenever  incurred  "  begins  from  the  time 
of  making  the  profession,  or  joining  the  order,  so  that  if  any- 
one should  be  ordained  or  make  profession  about  noon,  he  is 
obliged  after  assuming  the  order,  or  publishing  his  profes- 
sion, to  begin  on  that  day,  from  the  ninth  of  the  hours,  or 
at  least  from  the  vespers ;  because  that  is  the  ordinary  time 
of  reciting  the  aforesaid  hours :  he  is  not  obliged  to  read  the 
matin,  which  is  accustomed  to  be  recited  early  ;  because  the 
obligation  which  now  begins  is  not  retrospective  to  past 
time. 

"  What  if  some  one,  who  has  been  ordained,  or  has  pro- 
fessed about  noon,  had  already  before  recited  the  ninth  and 
vespers  ? 

"  He  seems  bound  to  repeat  those  hours  ;  because  he  has 
not  satisfied  the  precept ;  as  he  has  not  recited  in  the  name 
of  the  church,  inasmuch  as  he  was  not  as  yet  assumed  or 
deputed  by  the  church,"  &c. 

Those  who  hold  a  benefice  sufiicient  for  the  decent  sup- 
port of  a  clergyman  of  common  condition  are  obliged  daily 
to  recite  the  Canonical  hours.     (No.  31.) 

If  the  benefice  is  unproductive,  they  are  bound  to  recite 
them  sometimes,  but  not  daily.    (No.  32.) 

"But  it  is  to  be  observed  that  the  preceding  conclusions 
are  to  be  understood  concerning  a  benefice,  which  constant- 
ly, and  in  itself  produces  no  fruit  at  all,  or  but  little :  for  he 
who  has  a  benefice  in  itself  productive,  although  he  may  for 
some  years  lose  the  returns  through  the  devastation  of  wars, 
or  of  the  seasons,  or  on  account  of  particular  statutes,  by 
which  he  is  compelled  to  fast  for  one  or  two  years,  as  is 
said,  he  is  not  freed  for  that  time  from  the  recitation  of  the 
Canonical  hours  ;  because  this  benefice  is  in  itself  produc- 
tive ;  but  the  benefice,  which  is  a  perpetual  right,  and  the 
obligation  of  the  benefice,  have  nothing  to  do  with  the 
division  of  the  proceeds  of  one  or  another  year. 

"  Is  he,  who  is  absent  for  the  purpose  of  study,  or  by  dis- 
pensation, or  for  other  reasons,  on  account  of  which  he  de- 
rives no  returns  from  his  benefice,  delivered  from  the  burden 
of  reading  the  Canonical  hours  7 

"  Ans.  No :  because  the  defect  is  not  owing  to  the  bene- 
fice ;  indeed  the  beneficiate  is  not  exonerated,  although  he 
should  substitute  in  his  place  an  alternate,  who  frequents  the 


300  CANONICAL  HOURS. 

choir  and  recites  the  hours,  and  bears  the  other  burdens  of 
the  benefice,  &c. 

"  Hence,  observe  that  the  obligation  of  the  beneficiate  to 
recite  the  Canonical  hours  is  personal,  and  therefore  requires 
the  beneficiate's  own  agency,"  &c.  (No.  33.) 

What  a  wretched  perversion  of  the  sacred  privilege  of 
prayer  is  this !  The  very  Priests  are  taught  to  regard  their 
devotions  as  a  grievous  task !  Is  it  any  wonder  then  that 
the  Scriptural  adage  "  Like  Priest,  like  people,"  should  be 
verified  ?  These  holy  men  speak  of  being  "  delivered  from 
the  burden  of  reading  the  Canonical  hours ! !"  Bless  God, 
Christian,  that  you  have  not  received  the  Spirit  of  bondage, 
but  the  Spirit  of  adoption,  whereby  you  cry,  Abba,  Father ! 

No.  36.  treats  "  Of  Restitution  for  the  omission  of  the 
Canonical  hours."  The  amount  which  the  negligent  bene- 
ficiate is  obliged  to  pay  has  been  determined  by  a  Bull  of 
Leo  X.,  A.  D.  1514,  which  decree  Pius  V.,  A.  D.  1571, 
renewed  and  amplified  j  the  substance  of  which  is  the  fol- 
lowing : 

"  We  being  desirous  to  provide  more  evidently  and  ex- 
pressly for  this  thing,  resolve,  that  he  who  has  intermitted 
the  Canonical  hours  for  one  or  more  days,  shall  lose  all  the 
proceeds  of  his  benefice  or  benefices,  which  correspond  to 
that  day,  or  to  those  days,  if  they  should  be  daily  divided  ; 
but  he  who  omits  the  matin  only,  shall  lose  the  half;  he 
who  omits  all  the  other  hours,  the  other  half;  he  who  omits 
single  ones  of  these,  loses  the  sixth  part  of  the  proceeds  of 
the  same  day,"  &c.,  &c. 

In  No.  37,  the  following  question  is  asked : 

"  Is  a  parish  priest,  who  omits  the  Canonical  hours  on 
one  day,  obliged  to  restore  all  the  proceeds  of  that  day  ac- 
cording to  the  proportion  above  explained,  if  on  the  same 
day,  he  has  discharged  many  pastoral  functions ;  when  the 
Priest  receives  the  same  proceeds  also  on  account  of  pas- 
toral duty  ? 

**  We  answer  that  he  is  obliged  to  restore  all  the  proceeds 
according  to  the  positive  law  of  the  constitution  of  Pius  V. : 
and  it  may  be  said  that  this  law,  by  way  of  punishment,  de- 


CANONICAL  HOURS.  301 

prives  the  Priest  also  of  the  control  of  that  part  of  the 
proceeds,  which  appertains  to  the  pastoral  service. 

"  Yet,  by  divine  or  natural  law,  he  is  not  deprived  of  this 
part  of  the  proceeds,  and  therefore  if  we  regard  natural 
right,  not  all  the  proceeds  must  be  restored  in  the  case  laid 
down  :  because  some  are  due  to  him  on  account  of  pastoral 
duty :  and  this  division  may  take  place  in  the  first  six 
months  from  the  time  of  obtaining  a  parochial  or  otherwise 
onerous  benefice. 

"  Hence,  observe  it  would  seem  that  this  axiom — '  Bene- 
fice is  waived  for  the  sake  of  duty,'  should  be  understood 
not  only  concerning  the  office  of  the  canonical  hours,  but 
concerning  all  other  functions  and  burdens  annexed  to  the 
benefice.  Thus,  Suarez  and  Billuart,  &c.,  say  that  it  is 
more  plausible  that  a  priest  omitting  an  office  may  retain 
part  of  the  proceeds  for  the  pastoral  duty  which  he  has  per- 
formed." 

No.  39.    A  Case  in  point. 

"  A  beneficiate  throws  away  his  breviary,  that  he  may  not 
read  the  canonical  hours  this  week ;  but  being  sorry  for  this 
deed,  cannot  get  any  other  breviary  :  it  is  asked, 

"  Whether  this  inability  of  reciting  the  canonical  hours 
excuses  from  the  restitution  of  the  proceeds  ? 

"  Ans.  It  does  not  excuse :  because  this  inability  proceeds 
from  open  fraud ;  but  the  fraud  ought  not  to  be  excused  in 
him. 

"  Olj.  I.  Fraud  is  not  excused  in  him,  but  inability. 

"  Ans.  As  this  inability  proceeds  from  fraud,  thus  the 
excuse  proceeds  originally  from  fraud. 

"  Ohj.  11.  The  omission  of  the  hours  after  penitence  is 
involuntary  in  him  ;  therefore  it  excuses  from  restitution. 

"  Ans.  The  omission  is  involuntary  in  him  in  regard  to 
the  will  then  present,  so  that  he  does  not  sin  more.  I  admit 
the  omission  is  involuntary  in  regard  to  the  will  by  which 
he  occasioned  it,  but  I  deny  the  antecedent ;  for  that  omission 
was  voluntary  and  directly  intended,  in  throwing  away  the 
breviary,  which  is  sufficient  to  occasion  the  obligation  of  res- 
titution ;  just  as  unjust  injuries,  which  have  been  voluntary 
in  the  cause,  ought  to  be  repaired." 


302  CANONICAL  HOURS. 


Another  Case. 


"  A  beneficiate,  through  drunkenness,  or  through  a  serious 
fault,  has  contracted  a  sickness  by  which  he  is  rendered 
unable  to  recite  the  canonical  hours ;  it  is  asked,  whether  he 
may  be  excused  from  restitution  of  the  proceeds  1 

"  Ans.  Casuists  solve  this  case  by  a  distinction:  if  he  has 
done  it  for  the  sake  of  fraud,  or  with  the  intention  that  he 
"may  not  recite  the  hours,  he  is  not  excused  from  restitution, 
for  reasons  alleged  in  the  former  case.  —  La  Croix,  lib.  4, 
V.  1,  210. 

*'  But  if  it  happens  without  fraud  they  excuse  him  from 
restitution  on  the  plea  of  impotence ;  indeed,  they  adjudge  to 
the  same  the  daily  distributions  and  residence.  The  reason 
assigned  is,  '  that  sickness  is  from  Godj  and  the  superiors 
ought  not  to  make  inquiry  concerning  him,  but  leave  him  to 
the  judgment  of  God,  lest  affliction  be  added  to  the  scourged ;" 
&c. 

Concerning  the  Sin  of  the  Omission  of  the  Canonical 
Hours.    (No.  40.) 

"  What  kind  of  sin  is  it  to  omit  the  canonical  hours,  with 
respect  to  him  who,  by  the  precept  of  the  Church,  is  bound 
to  recite  them  ? 

"  Ans.  It  is  a  sin  against  the  virtue  of  religion ;  because 
the  law  enjoining  the  canonical  hours  has  been  introduced 
and  passed  formally  for  the  purpose  of  religion :  for  the 
recitation  of  the  canonical  hours  is  commanded  as  an  act  of 
religion. 

"Moreover,  a  rather  probable  opinion  teaches,  that  the 
beneficiate  sins  in  addition  against  commutative  justice,  and 
therefore  that  by  omitting  the  canonical  hours  he  sins  with 
a  twofold  oflfence ;  and  hence,  he  is  obliged  to  declare  that 
condition  of  the  benefice  in  confession,  and  is  bound  to  make 
restitution,  &c. 

"  What  meaning,  therefore,  has  this  axiom  :  *  Benefice  is 
waived  for  the  sake  of  duty.' 

"  Ans.  This  meaning,  that  the  right  of  receiving  the  pro- 
ceeds is  given  as  a  just  stipend  of  support  for  the  recitation 
of  the  divine  office,  or  the  annexed  spiritual  functions.  By 
no  means  does  it  suffer  that  meaning,  that  the  proceeds  of 


CANONICAL  HOURS.  303 

the  benefice  are  given  as  the  hire  of  spiritual  duty,  which 
sounds  like  simony,"  &c. 

Concerning  the  Grievousness  of  the  Sin  of  the  Omission 
of  the  Canonical  Hours.    (No.  41.) 

"  How  great  a  sin  is  the  omission  of  the  canonical  hours  ? 

"  It  is  a  sin,  from  its  very  nature,  mortal :  but  the  common 
opinion  declares,  that  the  omission  of  one  little  canonical 
hour,  V.  g.,  of  the  third,  is  sufficient  matter  for  mortal  sin. 

"  This  is  proved  more  from  the  common  opinion  and  prac- 
tice of  the  faithful,  than  from  any  law  or  reason. 

"  Huygens  indeed,  otherwise  rigid,  here  liberal,  attempts 
to  prove  with  many  arguments  that  the  omission  of  a  little 
canonical  hour  does  not  constitute  a  serious  matter :  but  in  a 
thing  of  such  moment  we  ought  not  to  recede  from  the  com- 
mon opinion ;  and  from  him  we  also  learn  that  the  omission  of 
one  of  the  shorter  psalms  is  not  a  serious  matter.  Suarez  adds : 
if  any  one  should  omit  nearly  the  half  of  the  Completorium, 
I  should  not  dare  affirm  that  he  sins  mortally. 

"  He  who  should  omit  vespers  on  the  Holy  Sabbbath 
should  be  judged  to  have  sinned  mortally,  if  not  from  the 
seriousness  of  the  matter,  certainly  from  contempt. 

"  Small  quantities  omitted  in  distinct  hours  of  the  same 
day,  coalesce,  and  if  together  they  amount  to  the  quantity 
of  one  little  canonical  hour,  they  will  again  constitute  a  mat- 
ter sufficient  for  deadly  sin.  The  quantities  of  distinct  days 
do  not  coalesce,  because  they  have  not  respect  to  the  same 
singular  precept. 

"  Does  the  omission  of  all  the  seven  hours  of  one  day  con- 
tain seven  sins  or  a  single  one  1 

"  Ans.  It  is  more  correctly  said  to  be  one  external  sin, 
equivalent  to  seven ;  and  therefore  to  contain  a  circumstance 
to  be  explained  in  confession ;  because  several  hours  are  as 
it  were  integral  parts  of  the  enjoined  office,  just  as  the  theft 
of  seven  patacones  is  one  sin  ;  internal  sins,  however,  may 
be  multiplied." 


SOi  CANONICAL  HOURS. 

Concerning  the  causes  which  excuse  from  the  recitation 
of  the  Canonical  Hours.     (No.  42.) 

These  three  are  specified. 

"1.  Inability,  physical  or  moral;  2.  Necessity,  or  a 
■duty  of  justice  or  charity ;  3.  The  dispensation  of  the 
Pope. 

"  To  inability  are  referred  natural  inadvertence,  blameless 
forget  fulness,  also  infirmity,  in  which,  without  serious  diffi- 
culty or  inconvenience,  the  hours  could  not  be  recited.  A 
slight  infirmity,  which  does  not  hinder  the  ordinary  actions 
of  the  head  or  tongue,  such  as  a  moderate  pain  of  the  head 
or  stomach  is,  does  not  excuse. 

"  The  danger  itself,  or  the  fear  of  a  grievous  evil,  of  death, 
relapse  into  sickness  or  debilities,  &c.,  can  afford  a  rational 
ground  of  excuse ;  as  the  laws  of  the  church  ordinarily  are 
not  obligatory  in  such  a  danger.  In  a  doubtful  case,  we 
must  abide  by  the  decision  of  a  physician  or  a  prudent  man. 

*'  A  duty  of  charity  excuses  from  the  reading  of  the  hours, 
v.  g.,  if,  in  an  unforeseen  case,  the  whole  remaining  part  of 
the  day  must  be  spent  in  administering  the  last  sacraments 
to  a  dying  person. 

"  The  employment  of  preparing  a  sermon,  or  a  similar 
function,  does  not  excuse  from  the  recitation  of  a  divine  of- 
fice. 

"  Observe,  that  the  above-mentioned  causes  may  at  one 
time  excuse  from  the  recitation  of  one  canonical  hour,  yet  so 
that  they  do  not  excuse  from  the  recitation  of  the  others ;  be- 
cause the  office  of  the  hours  is  not  prescribed  as  an  indivisi- 
ble whole ;  for  a  part  may  present  the  consideration  of  a  no- 
table prayer.  This  is  confirmed  from  this  54th  prop.,  con- 
demned by  Innoc.  XI.  *  He  who  cannot  recite  the  matin  and 
the  praises,  but  can  recite  the  remaining  hours,  is  under  no 
obligation,  because  the  greater  part  draws  to  itself  the  less.' 

*'  Hence,  if  any  blind  person,  or  one  who  is  without  a  bre- 
viary, knows  from  memory  how  to  recite  some  hours,  or  a 
considerable  part,  he  is  obliged  to  recite  them  ;  the  case  would 
be  different  if  he  could  only  recite  very  small  disconnected 
parts ;  for  then  neither  the  end  nor  the  substantial  form  of 
the  precept  could  be  preserved :  yet,  if  with  a  companion  he 
Is  able  to  recite  it  entire,  he  is  bound  to  do  so." 


CANONICAL  HOURS.  305 

If  about  noon  a  fever  is  expected,  the  time  of  reciting  the 
hours  must  be  anticipated ;  and  so  if  any  other  obstacle  is 
Hkely  to  intervene.  Excommunication,  suspension,  degra- 
dation, or  any  other  spiritual  punishment,  not  even  impris- 
onment, nor  condemnation  to  the  galleys  can  excuse  from 
the  duty  of  reciting  the  canonical  hours.  A  dispensation  or 
commutation  which  shall  validly  excuse  from  this  act  of  de- 
votion must  come  from  the  Pope. 

As  to  the  manner  of  reciting  the  hours,  it  must  be  devout 
and  studious.  "  The  office  is  studiously  recited,  when  it  is 
performed,  entirely  and  distinctly,  without  abridgment,  mu- 
tilation, or  interruption. 

"  It  is  devoutly  recited,  when  it  is  recited  with  religious 
intention  and  attention.  The  intention  is  the  act  of  the  will  ; 
but  attention  is  the  act  of  the  intellect,"  &c. 

As  to  the  place,  the  prayer  which  is  offered  in  the  temple 
is  more  profitable.     (No.  43.) 

Concerning  the  requisite  intention  in  the  recitation  of  the 
Canonical  Hours.    (No.  44.) 

"  This  intention  is  the  will  or  purpose  of  reciting  the  di- 
vine office  as  such. 

"  Is  this  intention  absolutely  necessary  ? 

"  Yes :  because  the  church  enjoins  the  recitation  of  the 
office  as  an  exercise  of  certain  religious  acts ;  but  without 
this  intention,  the  recitation  would  not  contain  that  exercise ; 
therefore,  this  intention  is  necessary.  Hence,  he  who  reads 
the  office  merely  materially  from  the  intention  only  to  study 
or  commit  it  to  memory,  or  to  know  the  histories,  does  not 
satisfy  the  obligation  of  the  precept  of  the  church,  because 
the  intention  of  worshipping  God,  of  praise,  of  prayer,  &c., 
is  wanting.  Thus  Suarez,  Wiggers,  Antoine,  and  La  Croix 
teach,"  &c.  &c. 

The  following  sections  treat  of  the  attention  requisite  in 
prayer ;  of  distraction  ;  of  distraction  indirectly  voluntary  ; 
of  the  sin  of  distraction.  In  No.  50,  which  treats  "Of  other 
defects  occurring  in  the  recitation  of  the  canonical  hours," 
we  find  this  question  : 

"  Ought  the  person  reciting  the  office  to  hear  himself,  as 
many  scholastics  crudely  declare? 
26 


30^  CANONICAL  HOURS. 

"  Ans.  This  is  wont  to  be  the  torment  of  the  scrupulous : 
it  may  be  said  with  Benac,  &c.,  that  it  is  not  necessary  that 
he  should  perceive  his  voice  with  his  own  ears  as,  v.  g.,  hap- 
pens, when  the  organs  of  sound  are  acted  upon  ;  but  that  is 
enough,  if  the  words,  by  the  allision  of  the  air  against  the 
teeth  and  lips,  are  so  formed  that  the  reciter  pronounces  sen- 
sibly in  his  mouth  all  the  words,  and  perceives  it  by  an  in- 
ternal hearing  as  it  were ;  and  this  is  sufficient  for  vocal 
prayer,  although  the  external  voice  may  not  be  heard :  be- 
cause the  hearing  is  not  noticed ;  nor  do  I  practically  see 
any,  except,  perhaps,  the  scrupulous,  tormented,  and  dis-" 
tressed  in  this  matter;  for  thus  the  deaf,  and  those  who  shut 
their  ears,  may  afford  satisfaction." 

The  faithful  are  then  cautioned  against  too  great  celerity 
and  anxious  slowness,  in  reciting  the  canonical  hours, 
&c.,  &c. 

"  What  advantage  does  this  prayer,  SacrosancttB,  <Sfc., 
afford  with  a  Pater  and  Ave,  when  it  is  said  after  the  reci- 
tation of  the  office  ? 

"  Ans.  Leo  X.  remitted,  byway  of  indulgence,  to  him  who 
says  it,  the  defects  and  faults  contracted  in  the  recitation  of 
the  office,  namely,  the  venial  ones,  adds  Billuart ;  so  that  he 
may  relieve  from  the  task  of  repeating  the  things  thus  recited. 

"Do  not,  therefore,  these  defects,  v.  g.,  committed  in  the 
recitation  of  the  matin,  if  after  the  matin,  some  one  should 
say  Sacrosanctcs,  <^c.,  coalesce  with  the  defects  which  one 
commits  afterwards  on  the  same  day,  in  the  recitation  of  the 
first,  third,  &c.  ? 

"  Ans.  According  to  the  above-mentioned  explanation,  it 
must  be  said,  that  they  would  not  coalesce :  because  a  person 
thus  reciting  has  been  freed  from  all  the  preceding  burden, 
just  as  if  he  had  recited  all  correctly.  I3ut  it  ought  to  be 
said  with  a  contrite  heart :  for  an  indulgence  supposes  that 
the  fault  is  remitted." 

Concerning  the  time  of  reciting  the  canonical  hours. 

(No.  58.) 

"  The  time  of  reciting  the  canonical  hours,  runs  from  mid- 
night, that  is,  from  the  twelfth  hour  of  one  night,  to  the  twelfth 
hour  of  the  following  night ;  after  twelve,  the  obligation  of  the 
precept  ceases :  for  this  burden  passes  with  the  day,  because 


CANONICAL  HOURS.  307 

the  time  is  determined  for  finishing  the  obligation,  and  the 
obh'gation  of  the  precept  is  distributed  through  single  days. 

"  By  legitimate  custom,  the  permission  has  been  introduced 
to  recite  the  matin  and  the  praises  of  the  office  of  the  follow- 
ing day,  on  the  preceding  evening,  and  thus  from  the  time 
at  which  the  sun  is  nearer  to*  setting,  than  to  midday,  as  is 
plain  from  the  table  concerning  the  time  of  beginning  the 
matin,  published  A.  D.  1706,  at  Rome,  with  the  type  of  the 
apostolic  chamber.  According  to  this  calculation,  it  is  per- 
mitted in  Belgium,  in  midsummer,  to  begin  in  the  seventh 
minute  after  the  fourth  hour,  in  the  afternoon,  because  the 
sun  then  sets  with  us  at  twelve  minutes  past  eight ;  in  the  midst 
of  winter,  at  five  minutes  before  the  second  hour ;  and  in 
each  equinox,  after  the  third  hour. 

"  Here,  beware  of  the  35  Prop,  among  those  condemned 
by  Alex.  VII.  :  '  Any  one  may  by  a  single  office  satisfy  a 
double  precept  for  the  present  day  and  for  to-morrow.' 

"  Ohj.  This  liberty  does  not  seem  reasonable,  because  the 
person  reciting  the  matin  in  the  evening,  at  the  second  feria 
will  be  obliged  to  say  a  falsehood  in  the  hymn,  '  With  limbs 
refreshed  with  sleep,  we  rise  from  the  spurned  bed  ;'  there- 
fore, &c. 

"  Ans.  I  deny  the  antecedent  and  the  proof:  for  such 
words  are  referred  figuratively  to  the  legitimate  time,  and  thus 
are  not  false. 

"  Moreover,  in  the  choir,  certain  times  are  assigned  for  the 
separate  offices  of  the  hours,  which  it  is  necessary  to  observe 
under  grievous  sin,  according  to  the  custom  of  the  same 
church  :  not  so  out  of  the  choir,  in  private  recitation  ;  but  yet 
out  of  the  choir,  it  will  be  considered  a  venial  offence  if  the 
office,  as  far  as  the  first,  is  not  said  before  noon :  because 
custom  and  the  propriety  of  the  office  require  this :  there- 
fore, the  accurate  time  of  reciting  the  matin  is  about  night  ; 
very  early  it  is  proper  to  recite  the  prajses  and  the  first :  in 
the  subsequent  time,  the  other  little  hours ;  vespers  are  said 
after  noon,  Lent  excepted.  To  anticipate  this  time,  or  defer 
till  after  it,  is  nothing  objectionable ;  as  is  mentioned  ch.  2, 
concerning  the  celebration  of  the  mass,"  &c. 


308  OF  THE  SIGN  OF  THE  CROSS. 

CHAPTER  XXIX. 

CONCERNING   THE     SIGN    OF   THE    CROSS. 

"  The  sign  of  the  cross  is  called  by  our  catechism,  lesson 
2,  by  way  of  distinction,  the  sign  of  a  Christian  man;  for  in 
every  age,  Christians  have  distinguished  themselves  from 
infidels,  by  making  the  sign  of  the  cross. 

"  The  same  catechism  denotes  2d,  a  two-fold  manner  of 
marking  one's  self  with  the  cross. 

"  The  first  is  that  by  which  a  person  touches  himself  on 
the  forehead  with  the  right  hand,  the  fingers  being  extended 
and  joined,  and  the  palm  being  turned  towards  him,  saying  : 
In  the  name  of  the  Father  ;  then  he  lets  his  hand  down  be- 
low the  breast,  saying :  and  of  the  Son  ;  from  there  he  moves 
his  hand  to  the  left  side  of  his  breast,  and  immediately  trans- 
fers it  to  the  right  side,  saying  at  the  same  time :  and  of  the 
Holy  Ghost ;  whilst  he  adds  Amen,  he  joins  his  hands  be- 
fore the  breast. 

"  The  second  mode  is  that  by  which  one  describes  a  cross 
with  the  thumb  on  the  forehead,  saying :  In  the  name  of  the 
Father  ;  and  over  the  mouth,  saying :  and  of  the  Son  ;  and 
over  the  breast,  saying :  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 

"  This  mode  we  use  at  the  reading  of  the  gospel,  by  which 
we  profess  that  we  bear  the  faith  and  the  gospel  in  the  mind, 
in  the  mouth,  and  in  the  heart,  or  afl^ections. 

"  The  catechism  above-mentioned  observes  3d,  that  in  form- 
mg  the  sign  of  the  cross,  we  profess  the  principal  myste- 
ries of  our  faith,  viz.  The  mysteries  of  the  most  holy  Trinity, 
the  incarnation,  and  the  passion  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  our  re- 
demption. 

"  Show  in  what  way  we  profess  the  mystery  of  the  most 
holy  Trinity. 

"  Ans.  By  saying  :  Of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and 
of  the  Holy  Ghost,  we  profess  three  divine  persons,  and  that 
they  are  distinct  among  themselves,  by  the  interjection  and  : 
by  saying  in  the  name  in  the  singular,  and  not  in  the  names, 
we  profess  one  and  the  same  nature,  or  the  divine  essence  of 


OF  THE  SIGN  OF  THE  CROSS.  309 

those  persons,  and  therefore  that  they  are  one  God  :  for  the 
name  does  not  denote  any  word,  but  signifies  the  divine  virtue, 
povi^er,  and  essence,  as  if  it  were  said,  In  the  virtue,  in  the 
power,  in  the  majesty  of  the  Father,  &c. 

"  Moreover,  when  we  draw  the  hand  from  the  forehead 
below  the  breast,  we  profess  that  the  Father  through  intellect 
generates  the  Son  from  eternity :  and  when  in  drawing  the 
hand  from  the  left  side  to  the  right,  we  join  the  lines  of  the 
cross,  we  profess  that  the  Holy  Spirit  is  the  bond  and  love 
of  the  Father  and  the  Son,  and  proceeds  from  them. 

"  We  profess  the  mystery  of  the  incarnation  of  Jesus 
Christ :  viz.,  by  placing  the  hand  from  the  forehead  below 
the  breast,  we  profess  that  the  Son  of  God  descended  from 
the  bosom  of  the  Father  into  the  womb  of  the  Virgin,  and 
assumed  human  nature ;  thus,  both  Christ's  generations  are 
here  signified,  either  his  eternal  nativity  from  the  Father,  or 
the  temporal  from  his  mother. 

"  We  profess  the  mystery  of  our  redemption,  and  of  the 
passion  of  the  Lord  Christ,  when  we  draw  forward  the  hand 
from  the  left  side  to  the  right  side,  and  at  the  same  time 
make  the  cross :  for  in  this  is  signified  that  the  Lord  Christ, 
by  his  cross  and  passion,  has  brought  us  from  a  state  of 
damnation  to  a  state  of  salvation. 

"  For  what  causes,  and  to  what  purposes  do  we  use  the 
sign  of  the  cross  ? 

"  With  the  Mechlin  Catechism  we  reply,  we  use  it  for  the 
exercise  of  virtues;  for  it  contains,  1.  an  act  of  faith  and 
of  profession  of  the  faith  of  the  principal  mysteries,  as  has 
been  shown  above. 

2.  It  contains  an  act  of  religion ;  for  it  is  a  short  and 
most  efficacious  prayer  to  God  through  the  merits  of  the 
passion  of  Christ,  by  which  we  invoke  the  help  of  God  in 
all  cases :  it  contains  also  a  reference  to  God  of  the  works 
to  which  it  is  prefixed. 

"  We  use  the  sign  of  the  cross  against  all  temptations,  and 
molestations  of  evil  spirits ;  for  the  devil  greatly  fears  and 
flees  from  the  cross,  by  which  he  has  been  overcome.  Thus 
St.  Antonius. 

"  We  exhibit  the  sign  of  the  cross  about  temporal  things 
in  blessing  them,  or  averting  evils  from  them ;  thus  we  bless 
food,  clothes,  houses,  &c.  St.  Benedict  with  the  sign  of  the 
26  * 


310  OF  THE  SIGN  OF  THE  CROSS. 

cross  BEOKE  IN  PIECES  A  POISONED  CUP ;  St.  Rochus,  by  a 
little  sign  of  the  cross  cured  those  infected  with  the 
PLAGUE.  Examples  of  the  virtue  and  efficacy  of  the  sign 
of  the  cross,  you  will  find  in  Hazart,  Turlot,  Marchant, 
&c.,  &c. 

"  From  these  remarks,  it  is  plain  to  what  salutary  effect 
we  may  use  this  sign  of  the  holy  cross,  frequently  through 
the  day,  and  before  all  business. 

"  From  what  time  has  the  sign  of  the  cross  been  in 
vogue  ? 

"  Ans.  From  the  time  of  the  apostles  and  of  Christ  him- 
self, says  the  Mechlinian  Catechism. 

"  Tertullian,  a  most  ancient  writer  towards  the  close  of 
the  second  century,  has  these  words,  lib.  de  Corona  Militis, 
c.  3.  'At  every  progress  and  moving  forward,  at  every 
going  in  and  going  out,  in  clothing  ourselves  and  putting  on 
our  shoes,  at  the  bath,  at  table,  at  the  lights,  at  the  bed- 
chambers, at  the  seats,  wherever  business  engages  us,  we 
rub  the  forehead  with  the  little  sign  of  the  cross.' 

"  St.  Jerome  to  Eustochius :  '  At  every  action,  at  every 
step,  let  the  hand  describe  the  cross.' 

"  Many  similar  testimonies  from  the  Holy  Fathers,  Augus- 
tine, Chrysostom,  Gregory,  &c.,  you  will  find  produced  by 
Hazart,  Catech.  less.  4.,  Turlot,  Catech.  I.  4  and  5 ;  so  that 
the  temerity  of  the  Calvinists,  who  abrogate  the  use  of  the 
sign  of  the  cross,  is  insane. 

"  In  the  Old  Testament,  the  figure  of  the  little  sign  of  the 
holy  cross  is  'found  Ezek.  ix.,  where  they  are  forbidden  to 
be  slain  whose  foreheads  were  marked  by  the  sign  Thau,  or 
T,  which  designates  the  cross. 

"  Ohj.  The  cross  brought  shame  and  sorrow  to  Christ : 
therefore,  the  sign  of  the  cross  is  rather  to  be  held  in  abhor- 
rence than  to  be  venerated  or  honoured :  because  the  son 
does  not  honour  the  gibbet  on  which  his  father  has  been 
hanged. 

"  Ans.  I  deny  the  inference :  because  the  cross  and  its 
sign  are  not  honoured  by  us  in  so  far  as  the  cross  was  em- 
ployed for  ignominy  by  the  crucifiers,  but  inasmuch  as  the 
cross  was  voluntarily  assumed  by  Christ  as  the  instrument 
of  our  redemption,  and  the  sign  of  his  triumph  and  victory 
over  sin  and  the  devil. 


OF  THE  SIGN  OF  THE  CROSS.  31 1 

"  For  proof,  I  say,  that  there  is  a  disparity,  because  the 
gibbet  affords  to  the  father,  neither  triumph,  nor  victory,  nor 
honour. 

"  Why  do  we  venerate  all  figures  of  the  cross,  of  what- 
ever material  prepared,  but  not  all  nails? 

"  Because  the  sign  of  the  cross  everywhere  presents  the 
passion  and  victory  of  the  Lord  Christ ;  but  this  all  nails  do 
not." 

If  Christ  and  his  apostles  authorized  the  use  of  the  sign 
of  the  cross,  and  were  in  the  habit  of  employing  it,  as  we 
learn  from  the  foregoing  remarks,  it  is  very  strange  that  the 
sacred  writers  are  utterly  silent  on  this  subject.  We  do  not 
read  that  they  ever  undertook  to  cast  out  devils,  or  heal 
diseases  by  this  potent  charm ;  much  less  that  they  blessed 
their  raiment  or  their  food  by  making  the  sign  of  the  cross. 
That  St.  Benedict  broke  in  pieces  a  poisoned  cup,  and  St. 
Rochus  cured  those  who  were  afflicted  with  the  plague,  by 
making  the  sign  of  the  cross,  are  facts  which  of  course  are 
not  to  be  questioned  by  any  but  infidels.  We  may  perhaps, 
however,  be  permitted  to  say,  that  if  there  is  any  priest  or 
saint,  in  these  ends  of  the  earth,  who  believes  that  there  is 
such  potency  in  the  use  of  this  sign,  we  shall  be  glad  to 
afford  him  a  public  opportunity  of  testing  its  virtue  on  any 
sound  piece  of  poisoned  crockery,  just  so  soon  as  he  is 
prepared  to  make  the  experiment.  How  their  reverences 
can  reconcile  it  to  their  consciences  to  suffer  so  many  cases 
of  small  pox  and  yellow  fever  to  terminate  fatally,  when 
they  have  such  a  remedy  at  hand,  and  have  free  access  to 
the  hospitals,  is  strange,  very  strange,  indeed !  The  man 
who  boasted  that  he  had  leaped  fifty  feet  at  Rhodes,  was 
told,  "  make  the  same  leap  here,  and  we  will  believe  you" — 
when  we  see  a  priest  or  a  saint  break  a  cup  by  the  sign  of 
the  cross,  we  shall  be  ready  to  believe  that  it  has  been  done. 
Till  then,  «  credat  Judeeus  Apella !" 


312  CONCERNING  MAGIC. 

CHAPTER  XXX. 
Concerning  Magic.     (No.  190.) 

"  The  word  Magi,  among  the  Greeks,  formerly  signified 
wise  men ;  in  which  way  it  is  understood,  Mai.  ii.  ver.  1  : 
*  Wise  men  (Magi)  came  from  the  east ;'  hence,  magic  is 
divided  into  natural  and  superstitious. 

"What  is  superstitious  magic? 

"  Ans.  It  is  the  art  of  effecting  wonderful  results  by  signs 
through  the  aid  of  the  devil.  Suarez  places  the  observance 
of  cures  under  the  head  of  magic. 

"  But  the  devil,  the  rival  of  God,  has  instituted  certain 
magical  signs  in  imitation  of  Christ's  instituting  the  sacra- 
ments. 

"  Observe  again,  that  the  fundamental  reason  of  all  that 
is  to  be  said  depends  on  this,  that  magical  signs  do  not  pro- 
duce those  effects,  either  from  the  nature  of  the  thing,  or 
from  the  appointment  of  God  or  the  church ;  therefore,  by 
the  influence  of  the  devil. 

"  Superstitious  magic  is  divided  into  magic,  properly  so 
called,  or  not  hurtful,  and  into  hurtful  or  witchcraft,  which 
therefore  has  a  twofold  malice,  both  against  religion  and 
against  justice. 

"  Witchcraft  is  subdivided  into  amatory,  by  which  car- 

,  nal  love  or  hatred  is  excited :  and  into  sorcery,  for  inflicting 

diseases  or  other  injuries  upon   men,  animals,  fruits,  &;c. ; 

but  the  devil  can  do  very  many  things  which  relate  to  local 

motion. 

Concerning  Magical  Signs,  and  the  remedies  against 
Magic.   (No.  191.) 

"  What  do  you  call  a  magical  sign? 

"That  which  they  exhibit  or  lay  down  according  to  an 
agreement,  at  least  implicit  with  the  devil,  which  being  pro- 
duced, the  devil  procures  the  effect. 

"  This  sign  sometimes  consists  in  words,  and  is  called  in- 
cantation; sometimes  in  a  permanent  thing,  as  straw,  pots, 


CONCERNING  MAGIC.  313 

strings,  bars,  &c.,  v.  g.,  straw  plaited  in  a  certain  way  is 
hidden  in  the  earth  in  order  to  kill  animals ;  so  long  as  that 
appointed  sign  of  straw  continues,  the  devil  does  injury  to 
the  cattle,  unless  he  be  hindered  by  exorcisms,  or  in  some 
other  way. 

"  May  evil  spirits,  therefore,  injure  certain  people  ? 

"  Ans.  No :  unless  God  permits  it  to  them,  as  is  plain 
from  the  history  of  Job.  Yet,  when  the  devil  has  the  aid 
of  some  person,  who  co-operates,  then  God  frequently  per- 
mits this  to  the  devil ;  because  then  the  human  race  is  thought 
to  injure  itself. 

"  Are  those  things  which  sometimes  appear  through  ma- 
gic art  really  such;  or  are  they  legerdemain  and  fantastic? 

"  I  reply  with  St.  Thomas,  that  these  things  sometimes 
appear  truly,  and  sometimes  by  means  of  trick  :  in  the  form- 
er mode,  the  sorcerers,  Exod.  viii.,  brought  real  frogs  upon 
the  earth  ;  in  the  latter  way,  the  transmutations  of  men  into 
cats  or  beasts  appear ;  because  these  cannot  be  effected  by 
the  power  of  the  devil,  but  they  are  done  through  the  illu- 
sions of  the  senses,  or  through  forms  portrayed  in  the  air. 

"  Likewise  the  apparitions  of  the  dead  through  incanta- 
tions are  false  ;  so  that  if  any  one  appears,  he  is  a  devil,  and 
not  the  soul  of  a  deceased  person.  We  admit,  indeed,  that 
Samuel,  1  Kgs.  xxviii.,  truly  appeared,  according  to  Eccli. 
xlvi. ;  but  by  the  special  appointment  of  God  for  the  reproof 
of  Saul. 

"  What  are  the  remedies  against  magic  1 

"  Ans.  A  lively  faith,  and  great  confidence  in  God.  Ps. 
xc. 

"  2.  The  frequent  use  of  the  Sacraments. 

"  3.  Prayer  and  fasting,  the  sign  of  the  cross,  the  invoca- 
tion of  the  name  of  Jesus  and  the  Saints. 

"  4.  The  exorcisms  of  the  church,  the  use  of  blessed 
water,  the  exhibition  of  holy  relics,  &c. 

"  5.  The  use  of  natural  medicines  against  diseases  or 
evils  of  this  kind. 

"  6.  The  lawful  destruction  of  the  magical  sign  :  v.  g.  by 
burning  the  straw  or  papers,  by  breaking  the  pots,"  &c. 

"  Is  it  lawful  to  destroy  the  magical  signs  of  witchcraft, 
and  in  what  way  ?   (192.) 

"  Certainly  it  is  unlawful  to  destroy  them  by  any  other 


314  CONCERNING  MAGIC. 

witchcraft,  or  by  any  other  superstitious  act :  because  it  is 
not  lawful  to  do  evil  that  good  may  come. 

"  It  is  certainly  lawful  to  destroy  magical  signs  with  the 
intention  and  aim  that  sins  may  be  diminished,  and  for  the 
detestation  and  hatred  of  magical  iniquity,  in  the  same  way 
as  it  is  lawful  to  destroy  idols.     But  the  question  is  mooted, 

"  Whether  it  is  lawful  to  destroy  these  magical  signs  for 
the  sole  purpose  that  the  injury  may  cease? 

"  This  question  is  more  speculative  than  practical ;  be- 
cause by  destroying,  the  purpose  of  detesting  the  diabolical 
art  may  easily  be  intended  :  however, 

"  Delrio,  Suarez,  Wiggers,  Boudart,  and  others,  maintain 
the  affirmative  answer,  because  the  object  is  honourable  and 
proportionate,  against  Hesselius,  Estius,  and  Sylvius.  Delrio 
also  observes  that  Hesselius  was  the  first  who  contradicted 
this  opinion :  but  the  principal  argument  of  Hesselius  upon 
which  the  others  depend  is  this  following : 

"  Ohj,  He  who  destroys  a  magical  sign  that  the  injury 
may  cease,  does  not  expect  the  effect  of  cessation  from  God, 
nor  from  any  cause,  natural  or  human :  therefore  he  ex- 
pects it  from  the  agreement  of  the  devil. 

"  Ans.  I  deny  the  antecedent ;  for  the  sign  being  destroy- 
ed, the  efTect  is  expected  from  God,  not  by  a  miracle,  but 
from  his  ordinary  providence,  by  which  he  does  not  usually 
permit  that  the  devil  should  inflict  injury  upon  men,  after  the 
magical  sign  is  destroyed.  But  this  destructive  action  is 
honourable  from  its  object  and  end :  for  it  is  just  to  destroy 
the  works  of  the  devil,  1  John  iii.  8.  *  For  this  purpose  the 
Son  of  God  appeared,  that  he  might  destroy  the  works  of 
the  devil.'  And  because  he  who  destroys  the  magical  sign 
does  not  fulfil  the  compact  of  the  devil,  but  rather  destroys 
it ;  and  for  this  reason  we  think  the  same  is  lawful,  although 
the  magical  sign  should  consist  in  something  negative  or 
privative. 

"  Is  it  lawful  to  ask  a  sorcerer  to  take  away  the  spell  ? 

"  It  is  lawful,  on  condition  that  he  takes  it  away  in  a  law- 
ful manner. 

"  If  it  is  foreseen  that  he  will  do  it  by  magic  art,  it  is  not 
permitted  to  ask :  indeed,  if  any  magician  should  of  his  own 
accord,  offer  to  destroy  the  spell  by  magical  or  superstitious 
art,  it  is  lawful  neither  to  accept  nor  to  permit  it. 


CONCERNING  MAGIC.  315 

"  The  reason  is,  because  it  is  not  lawful  to  accept  a  benefit 
from  the  devil ;  because  this  involves  a  certain  fellowship 
with  the  devil,  and  a  recognition  of  his  excellence  as  a  bene- 
factor through  his  own  compact. 

"  ObJ.  It  is  lawful  simply  to  ask  a  loan  from  an  usurer, 
and  an  oath  from  one  who  will  swear  by  false  gods ;  there- 
fore it  is  lawful  to  seek  the  destruction  of  witchcraft  from  a 
wizard,  at  least  when  he  can  destroy  it  in  a  lawful  manner. 

"  Ans.  I  deny  the  inference :  there  is  a  reason  of  disparity, 
because  it  is  lawful  to  receive  benefits  even  from  sinful  men, 
but  not  from  the  devil,  for  the  above-mentioned  reason  :  hence 
St.  Leo :  '  The  benefits  of  devils  are  more  injurious  than 
wounds.'" 

Rules  for  discerning  Witchcraft.  (No.  193.) 

"  From  what  things  can  it  be  discerned,  whether  an  evil 
proceeds  from  witchcraft,  or  from  some  other  cause? 

"  Ans.  This  discrimination  is  sometimes  difficult :  how- 
ever, these  marks  of  witchcraft  are  usually  assigned. 

"1.  If  the  evil  exceeds  the  natural  or  ordinary  causality 
of  things;  v.  g.,  if  hair,  bones,  needles,  bits  of  iron,  &c.,  are 
found  in  the  stomach. 

"  2.  If  the  afflicted  person  suffers  violence,  by  intervals,  as 
it  were. 

"  3.  If  skilful  physicians  are  confidently  of  opinion  that 
the  evil  does  not  proceed  from  a  natural  cause :  if  medicines, 
and  other  natural  means,  produce  no  effect. 

"  4.  If  spiritual  means  and  exorcisms  are  seen  to  be  spe- 
cially advantageous  ;  or,  on  the  other  hand,  if  when  they  are 
employed,  the  evil  appears  to  be  increased  on  their  account  ,* 
in  which  case  we  are  not  to  cease,  but  more  boldly  to  perse- 
vere with  all  spiritual  means. 

"  You  will  find  more  on  these  subjects  in  Malderus,  Tract. 
10.  dub.  15,  and  Neesen,  Tract  9.  De  DcBmoniacis." 

This  chapter  presents  a  specimen  of  the  present  fanaticism 
and  foolery  of  the  Church  of  Rome.  Exorcisms  are  con- 
stantly performed  by  their  priests,  and  evil  spirits  are  made 
to  flee  before  the  sign  of  the  cross,  the  sprinkling  of  holy 
water,  the  exhibition  of  sacred  relics,  &c.  &c. ! !     We  cer- 


316  •  OF  LYING. 

tainly  believe  that  evil  spirits  exist,  and  that  the  prince  of 
darkness  exerts  a  fearful  power  over  the  children  of  disobe- 
dience, and  we  should  be  rejoiced  if  the  exorcisms  of  Romish 
priests  possessed  infinitely  more  virtue  than  the  credulous 
faithful  believe,  for  then  there  would  be  strong  evidence  that 
the  kingdom  of  Satan  would  speedily  be  overthrown ;  as  a 
house  divided  against  itself  cannot  stand  !  As  matters  are  at 
present,  we  apprehend,  the  Devil  never  feels  greater  satisfac- 
tion than  when  the  priests  aim  at  him  a  quantum  suff.  of  holy 
water,  and  exhibit  the  musty  rags,  dry  bones,  &c.,  which 
are  facetiously  called  "  sacred  relics  !" 


CHAPTER  XXXI. 

Concerning  Lying  and  its  division.    (No.  242.) 

"  The  vice  opposed  to  the  virtue  of  truth,  is  the  habit  of 
lying  ;  yet  lying  is  used  more  frequently  for  the  act  of  this 
vice,  and  is  thus  defined :  *  Speaking  contrary  to  the  mind  of 
the  speaker.' 

"  tinder  speaking  is  comprehended  every  external  sign 
whatsoever ;  and  thus  we  can  lie  by  writing,  by  gestures, 
nods,  or  other  actions. 

"  May  any  one  lie,  whilst  speaking  a  thing  that  is  true  ? 

*'  Ans.  Yes  :  if  he  supposes  in  his  mind  that  it  is  false :  on 
the  other  hand,  one  who  speaks  a  falsehood  does  not  lie,  if 
he  prudently  believes  it  to  be  true :  the  reason  is  that  he  does 
not  speak  against  his  mind  :  yet  any  one  may  be  guilty  of 
the  fault  of  lying,  if  through  defect  of  due  investigation, 
through  precipitancy  or  much  speaking,  he  exposes  himself 
to  the  danger  of  saying  what  is  false. 

"  How  is  falsehood  divided  ? 

*'  It  is  divided,  by  reason  of  the  fault  and  of  the  object,  into 
officious,  jocose^  and  pernicious. 

"  Lying  is  called  officious,  which  is  committed  only  on  ac- 
count of  one's  own  advantage  or  that  of  another  :  v.  g.,  some 


OF  LYING.  317 

one  says  that  he  has  no  money,  that  he  may  not  be  robbed 
of  it  by  soldiers. 

"  Jocose  is  that  which  is  committed  only  for  the  sake  of 
sport :  V.  g.,  some  one  lies  that  he  is  a  Mechlinian,  that  he 
may  provoke  to  laughter. 

"  Lying  is  called  pernicious^  which,  besides  the  wicked- 
ness of  lying,  has  some  injury  or  evil  adjoined,  from  which 
it  contracts  other  wickedness  :  therefore,  all  pernicious  lies 
are  not  of  the  same  kind,  but  they  assume  an  appearance  of 
wickedness  from  the  injury  or  evil  from  which  they  are 
called  pernicious :  thus  a  pernicious  falsehood,  by  which  de- 
traction from  the  reputation  of  a  neighbour  through  the  im- 
putation of  something  false  is  occasioned,  has  the  wickedness 
of  injustice ;  lying  against  the  faith  is  pernicious,  and  assumes 
malice  against  the  faith." 

Pernicious  lying  is  from,  its  nature,  a  mortal  sin ;  offi- 
cious and  jocose  lying,  are  from  their  nature,  venial  sins. 

May  Lying  he  lawful  in  any  case  7    (No.  243.) 

**  Plato,  Origen,  and  some  ancients,  thought  so ;  but  the 
negative  answer  is  certain ;  the  reason  is  because  all  lying 
is  intrinsically  evil,  and  forbidden  by  the  natural  law ;  for 
words  are  naturally  the  signs  of  the  understanding,  says  St. 
Thomas.  The  same  is  proved  from  the  Holy  Fathers,  Am- 
brose, Augustine,  &c. ;  and  it  is  said,  Eccl.  vii.  14,  *Be  not 
willing  to  make  any  manner  of  lie.' 

"  Ohj.  Out  of  two  evils  the  less  is  to  be  chosen ;  therefore, 
it  is  lawful  to  lie,  v.  g.,  to  avoid  homicide. 

"  Ans.  I  deny  the  inference :  because  to  lie  is  a  formal 
sin :  and  thus  to  lie  is  a  greater  evil  than  to  permit  homicide 
merely  permissively.  And,  according  to  the  apostle,  Rom. 
iii.  8,  it  is  not  lawful  to  do  evil  that  good  may  come. 

"  Therefore,  it  is  not  lawful  to  lie  in  order  to  avert  death 
or  the  ruin  of  the  state  or  any  other  evils :  in  perplexities  of 
this  kind,  men  should  betake  themselves  to  the  help  of  God, 
of  their  guardian  angel,  &c." 

Concerning  mental  Restriction.    (No  244.) 

"  Mental  restriction  is  twofold :  purely  mental,  and  not 
purely  mental,  or  real. 

"  Real  restriction  occurs,  when  the  declaration  is  false ;  if 
27 


318  OF  LYING. 

we  regard  the  words  alone :  but  circumstances  concur  which 
signify  that  something  is  to  be  secretly  understood,  which 
the  speaker  keeps  in  his  mind,  and  which  being  secretly  un- 
derstood, the  declaration  is  true :  v.  g.,  John,  desiring  forth- 
with in  the  market  to  speak  to  Peter,  asks  of  Paul :  '  Have 
you  seen  Peter  V  Paul  replies,  ^  I  have  not  seen  him,^  although 
he  has  seen  him  yesterday,  or  four  hours  ago. 

"This  reply  or. real  restriction  does  not  contain  a  lie,  be- 
cause by  the  circumstance  of  John's  asking  forthwith  to 
speak  to  Peter,  he  is  restricted  to  the  immediate  time ;  but 
now  not  the  words  alone  make  the  declaration  true,  but  also 
external  circumstances,  or  concomitant  signs,  custom,  &c., 
are  likewise  significant. 

"  Hence  infer,  how  it  is  that  metaphors,  hyperbole,  and 
other  rhetorical  figures,  do  not  involve  falsehoods. 

"  A  purely  mental  restriction  is  committed,  when  a  de- 
claration is  made,  which,  considering  all  the  external  circum- 
stances and  signs,  is  false,  but  to  which  in  the  mind  of  the 
speaker  something  is  internally  added  or  secretly  understood, 
by  which  it  would  become  true,  which  internal  thing  is  yet 
manifested  or  made  known  by  no  sign ;  v.  g.,  John  being 
asked,  whether  he  has  seen  Peter  to-day,  whom  he  had  in 
reality  seen,  replies,  I  have  not  seen  him  to-day,  by  secretly 
understanding,  in  Spain,  &c. 

"  Does  purely  mental  restriction  excuse  from  falsehood  ? 

"  Ans.  No :  because  this  internal  restriction  is  manifested 
by  no  external  sign ;  and  therefore  is  not  signified  with  the 
other;   and  thus  the  external  declaration   remains   simply 


"  Moreover,  by  restriction  purely  mental,  human  society 
would  be  disturbed  in  the  same  way  as  by  falsehoods. 

"  It  is  proved  also  by  the  condemnation  of  this  26th  pro- 
position of  Innocent  XI.,  'If  any,  either  alone  or  before 
others,  whether  asked,  or  of  his  own  accord,  or  for  the  pur- 
pose of  sport,  or  for  any  other  object,  swears  that  he  has  not 
done  something  which  in  reality  he  has  done,  by  understand- 
ing within  himself  something  else,  which  he  has  not  done, 
or  a  different  way  from  that  in  which  he  has  done  it,  or  any 
other  truth  that  is  added,  he  does  not  really  lie,  nor  is  he 
perjured.' 

"La  Croix,  indeed,  prudently  admonishes,  lib.  3.  p.  1,  n. 


OF  LYING.  319 

295,  refuting  restriction  purely  mental,  that  since  the  con- 
dennnation  of  the  aforesaid  proposition,  certain  authors,  who 
wrotebefore  the  condennnation,areto  be  read  cautiously:  mean- 
while, however,  I  do  not  clearly  see  how  he  himself.  No.  228, 
sufficiently  differs  from  them,  when  he  says  that  it  is  lawful 
for  a  homicide,  who  is  asked  whether  he  has  killed  that  man, 
to  reply,  I  have  not  killed  him,  by  secretly  understanding  in 
his  mind,  so  that  I  ought  to  confess  it  to  you;  in  the  same 
way  that  it  is  lawful  to  reply  to  one  who  asks  whether  a 
robber  has  passed  this  way :  he  has  not  passed  this  way,  if 
he  at  the  same  time  puts  his  hand  into  his  glove,  meaning 
that  he  has  not  passed  through  the  glove ;  for  this  sign  is 
supposed  to  be  secret,  or  not  perceptible,  so  as  to  be  signified 
together  with  the  rest ;  just  as  the  motion  of  the  eyes  in 
speaking  would  not  be  a  sufficient  consignificant  sign  to  be 
secretly  understood  externally,  he  has  not  passed  through 
my  eyes. 

"  However,  if  this  thrusting  of  the  hand  into  the  glove 
should  be  sufficiently  manifest,  and  perceptibly  or  intelligibly 
connected  with  words,  then  Boudart  himself  excuses  the 
reply  from  falsehood,"  &c.  &c. 

Concerning  Ambiguity  and  Equivocation.   (No.  245.) 

"  Is  it  proper  to  speak  with  ambiguity  and  equivocation? 

"  The  case  is  this :  a  proposition  or  a  word  admits  of  two 
senses  or  meanings  :  v.  g.,  this  proposition,  '  Dico  latronem 
Petrum  occidisse.'  /  say  a  robber  killed  Peter,  may  signify 
that  the  robber  has  killed  Peter ;  and  on  the  other  hand,  that 
Peter  has  killed  the  robber.  In  the  same  way,  the  word 
mundus  may  signify  the  globe,  and  cleanliness;  hence  this 
declaration  is  equivocal :  *  Mundus  non  est  mundus ;'  (which 
may  signify  either,  the  world  is  not  a  world,  or  the  world 
is  not  clean.'') 

"  An  equivocation  of  this  kind  does  not  contain  a  lie,  in 
whatever  sense  it  may  be  received  ;  because  the  external 
words  truly  signify  that  sense,  which  the  speaker  has  in  his 
mind  ;  and  thus  differs  from  a  purely  mental  reservation,  in 
which  the  external  words  do  not  contain  the  mental  sense. 

"  Therefore,  it  is  proper  for  just  reasons  to  use  this  in 
either  sense ;  thus  the  angel,  Tob.  v.  18,  said  metaphorically  ; 


320  OF  LYING. 

'  I  am  Azariasj  the  son  of  the  great  Ananias,  that  is,  I  am 
the  aid  of  the  Lord,  the  adopted  Son  of  God,'  &c. 

"  Ohj.  The  person  using  such  an  equivocation  intends  to 
cheat  and  deceive  another  :  but  this  is  contrary  to  the  sin- 
cerity of  human  society  ;  therefore,  it  is  not  lawful. 

"  Ans.  I  deny  the  assertion  :  but  he  intends  to  speak  the 
truth  which  he  has  in  his  mind  :  he  permits  the  deception  of 
the  other  from  his  wrong  understandings*  and  because  a  jus^ 
cause  is  required  that  he  may  be  excused  from  all  sin. 

"  An  opportune  mode  of  getting  rid  of  the  importunate 
questions  of  inquisitive  men,  is  reciprocally  to  propose  a  ques- 
tion :  V.  g.,  if  they  ask,  whether  you  know  this  ?  whether 
you  have  done  this  ?  you  may  reply,  whence  should  I  know 
this  ?  why  should  I  do  this  ?  &c.  In  a  similar  way,  Christ, 
Luke  xxiv.  19,  to  the  question  of  the  disciples  going  to  Em- 
maus,  replied,  saying :   What  things  ?" 

The  closing  remarks  of  this  section  plainly  show  that 
equivocation  is  no  sin,  in  the  estimation  of  a  disciple  of  Peter 
Dens.  This  is  no  new  discovery,  and  it  is  therefore  not  be- 
coming that  we  should  speak  of  it  as  something  strange  or 
unexpected.  A  very  little  acquaintance  with  the  practice  of 
the  veracious  pupils  and  admirers  of  Peter  Dens,  is  sufficient 
to  teach  us  that  they  understand  the  art  of  equivocation  to 
perfection.  But  the  horrid  attempt  to  make  the  blessed  Sa- 
viour, whose  title  is,  Faithful  and  True  Witness,  en- 
courage the  practice  of  this  detestable  vice,  is  blasphemy  for 
which  we  were  not  prepared.  The  very  attempt  at  refuta- 
tion would  be  irreverent.  Let  the  reader  turn  to  Luke  xxiv. 
19,  and  he  will  see  that  nothing  could  have  been  farther  from 
the  Saviour's  mind  than  the  intention  of  furnishing  a  prece- 
dent for  the  deceitful  equivocations,  which  are  the  glory  of 
the  Church  of  Rome ! 


OF  FASTING.  321 


CHAPTER  XXXII. 


Concerning  Fastings  and  its  division.  (No.  254.) 

PoLMAN  explains  several  meanings  of  the  word  fastings 
and  thus  he  divides  fasting  into  the  philosophical^  medicinal^ 
penitential,  moral,  spiritual,  natural,  and  ecclesiastical. 

"  Spiritual  or  metaphorical  fasting  is  to  abstain  from  sins. 
S.  Aug.  Treat.  17,  on  John. 

"  Moral  fasting  is  abstinence  from  food  and  drink,  accord- 
ing to  the  dictate  of  natural  reason,  for  a  moral  end,  v.  g.,  to 
restrain  concupiscence.  This  fasting  may,  by  natural  right 
in  itself,  be  obligatory  upon  every  one,  even  an  infidel,  by  the 
force  of  the  precept  of  temperance ;  or  through  some  circum- 
stance, by  reason  of  another  virtue  :  for  natural  reason  dic- 
tates that  every  one  ought  to  use  a  proper  remedy  for  avoid- 
ing sin  :  but  this  obvious  remedy  frequently  is  fasting :  for 
this  reason,  St.  Thomas  says,  a.  3.,  that  fasting  in  general 
falls  under  the  precept  of  natural  right. 

"  Theologians  here  treat  principally  of  the  fasting  which 
falls  under  the  precept  of  the  church  ;  and  they  divide  it  into 
natural  and  ecclesiastical  fasting. 

"  What  is  natural  fasting  1 

"  It  is  abstinence  from  all  food  and  drink  transmitted  to  the 
stomach,  or  from  every  thing  that  is  taken  by  way  of  food, 
or  drink,  or  medicine,  from  midnight. 

"  Observe  that  this  natural  fast  which  is  enjoined  before 
taking  the  Eucharist,  is  not  properly  an  act  of  the  virtue  of 
abstinence  or  temperance,  but  an  act  of  the  virtue  of  religion  : 
because  it  is  enjoined  by  the  church  for  the  purpose  of 
reverence  to  the  sacrament :  but  an  ecclesiastical  fast  is  an 
act  of  the  virtue  of  abstinence." 

Concerning  Ecclesiastical  Fasting.  (No.  255.) 

"  What  is  an  ecclesiastical  fast  ? 

"  It  is  on  certain  days,  according  to  the  custom  and  pre- 
scription of  the  church,  to  abstain  from  meats  under  a  single 


322  OF  FASTING. 

refreshment  in  the  day,  not  to  be  taken  before  the  proper 
hour. 

"  Therefore  an  ecclesiastical  fast  contains  three  parts,  viz. 
1.  Abstinence  from  meats,  under  which  are  understood,  eggs, 
and  milk  diet,  which  derive  their  origin  from  flesh ;  2,  absti- 
nence from  more  refreshments  except  a  single  one  from  other 
food ;  3,  that  the  appointed  hour  be  not  anticipated ;  and  thus 
in  this  time,  refreshment  may  not  be  taken  before  noon. 

"  Hence,  it  is  plain  that  this  fast  may  be  violated  in  a  three- 
fold way,  and  thus  mortal  sin  may  be  committed  in  a  three- 
fold manner;  1,  by  eating  forbidden  food;  2,  by  taking 
several  refreshments  ;  3,  by  anticipating  the  hour  of  refresh- 
ment. For  this  reason,  he  who  confesses  that  he  has  broken 
his  fast,  must  be  asked,  which  of  the  three  parts  of  the  fast 
he  has  violated. 

"  Observe,  that  some  fasts  do  not  oblige  to  the  observance 
of  these  three  parts :  thus  fasts  on  holidays  and  Sabbaths, 
throughout  the  year,  oblige  to  the  mere  abstinence  from 
meats,  according  to  the  custom  of  the  place ;  and  fasts  of  the 
days  of  Rogation  do  not  forbid  a  second  refreshment  after 
noon :  but  these  fasts  are  called  imperfect  fasts." 

Concerning  the  Quadragesimal  Fast.  (No.  256.) 

"  The  quadragesimal  fast  is  the  most  solemn  throughout 
the  whole  church,  because  it  derives  its  origin  from  the  Apos- 
tles, in  imitation  of  Christ ;  although  it  has  since  then  under- 
gone various  changes :  for  formerly,  until  the  times  of  S. 
Bernard,  the  fast  was  observed  until  evening  ;  in  the  thirteenth 
century,  in  the  time  of  S.  Thomas,  until  the  third  hour  in  the 
afternoon  :  a  little  after,  from  the  time  of  Durandus ;  and  in 
these  times,  it  is  permitted  through  custom  to  take  a  single 
refreshment  about  noon,  and  a  little  collation  in  the  evening. 
The  vestige  of  the  ancient  custom,is,  however,  still  preserved 
in  the  church,  when,  in  Lent,  vespers  are  sung  before  noon, 
or  before  the  refreshment. 

"  During  the  time  of  Lent,  abstinence  must  be  observed 
also  on  the  Lord's  days  occurring  in  it,  not  only  from  meats, 
but  also  from  eggs  and  milk  diet,  namely,  butter,  milk,  cheese, 
&c.,  which  derive  their  origin  from  flesh  ;  by  custom,  how- 
ever, in  this  country,  in  our  day,  the  eating  of  milk  diet  is 
permitted,  except  on  a  Cew  days  designated  by  the  Bishop ; 


OF  FASTING.  323 

only  this  indulgence  is  compensated  by  certain  prayers  or 
alms.     Steyaert  admits  the  real  obligation  of  this,  &c. 

"  On  Lord's  days  in  Lent,  although  abstinence  from  meats 
must  be  observed,  yet  abstinence  from  several  refreshments 
is  not  obligatory ;  nor  is  a  certain  hour  of  refreshment  to  be 
observed.  ^  Generally,  on  the  other  Lord's  days,  no  fast  is 
kept  on  account  of  joy  for  the  resurrection  of  Christ ;  al- 
though this  is  proper  on  that  day.  Formerly,  indeed,  some 
Holy  Fathers  prehibited  fasting  on  the  Lord's  day,  but  in 
order  to  avoid  the  errors  of  heretics,  suppose  the  Manichceans. 
Hence  it  is  observed,  that  when  a  vigil  in  which  a  fast  is  to 
be  observed,  falls  on  a  Lord's  day,  the  fast  is  kept  on  the 
preceding  Sabbath  :  but  yet  a  festival,  except  the  Lord's  day, 
does  not  alter  the  fast,  unless  it  is  the  feast  of  Corpus  Christi, 
or  the  solemnity  of  the  Patron  of  the  State,  says  Sylvius. 

"  Is  the  obligation  of  abstaining  from  eggs  and  milk  diet 
serious  ? 

"  Ans.  It  appears  so ;  because  in  them  a  serious  matter 
may  be  afforded  :.  yet  it  is  often  light.  Hear,  prop.  32,  con- 
demned by  Alexand.  VII. ;  *  It  is  not  evident  that  the  custom 
of  not  eating  eggs  and  milk  diet  in  Lent  is  obligatory.' 

"  Heretics  object  that  there  are  no  testimonies  extant  con- 
cerning the  fast  of  Lent  in  the  epistles  of  the  apostles. 

"  This  fast  has  been  propagated  by  apostolic  tradition.  For 
the  proof  of  this,  that  golden  rule  of  St.  Augustine,  bk.  4, 
against  the  Donatists,  ch.  xxiv.,  is  sufficient :  '  What  the  uni- 
versal Church  holds,  and  which  is  not  appointed  by  Coun- 
cils, but  has  always  been  retained,  is  most  justly  believed  to 
be  handed  down  by  nothing  else  than  apostolic  authority.' 

"  Whoever  wishes  more  particularly  to  learn  the  rise,  pro- 
gress, and  changes  of  the  aforesaid  fasts,  let  him  consult  the 
work,  R.  P.  Cozza,  '  Concerning  fasting.' 

"  Obj.  Mark  ii.  19,  Christ  says,  that  the  sons  of  the 
Bridegroom  can  not  fast ;  but  Christians  are  the  sons  of  the 
Bridegroom ;  therefore,  &c. 

"  Ans.  The  saying  is  parabolical :  by  the  sons  of  the 
Bridegroom  are  meant  the  disciples  of  Christ,  and  it  is  sig- 
nified that  it  is  not  proper  thai  Christ,  whilst  he  tarried  with 
them  on  earth,  should  make  them  fast  or  mourn,  as  Matthew 
expresses  it,  ch.  ix.  v.  15  ;  but  after  the  death  of  Christ  they 
fasted  ;  as  Paul  testifies  concerning  himself,  2  Cor.  vi.  5,  and 


324  OF  FASTING. 

xi.  27.     St.  Thomas  offers  two  other  replies,  q.  147,  art.  4, 
ad.  5. 

Concerning  Abstinence  from  Meats.     (No.  257.) 

"  Why  is  the  eating  of  meat  on  a  fast  day  forbidden  ? 

"  Because  fasting  has  been  instituted  for  the  mortification 
of  the  flesh,  or  for  restraining  the  lust  of  taste  and  concu- 
piscence, &c. 

"  Under  meats  are  included  the  broth  of  meats,  and  those 
things  which  derive  their  origin  from  flesh,  as  eggs,  &;c. 

"  The  meats  of  the  animals  which  are  considered  as  for- 
bidden, are  better  ascertained  from  common  custom :  the 
flesh  of  turtles,  frogs,  and  the  like,  which  are  nourislied  in 
the  water,  are  not  included,  &c. 

"Why  is  not  wine  forbidden,  in  which  there  is  luxury? 
Prov.  XX. 

"  Because  wine  elsewhere  is  an  ordinary  and  necessary 
drink. 

"St.  Thomas,  art.  8,  ad.  1.  Because  wine  excites  lust 
only  by  reason  of  heat,  which  quickly  passes  away ;  but 
meats  promote  it  by  reason  of  the  humour,  which  remains 
long,"  &c.  &c. 

"  How  great  a  sin  is  it  to  eat  flesh  on  a  day  of  fasting  or 
abstinence  1 

"  It  is,  from  its  very  nature,  a  mortal  sin ;  because,  in  it 
a  serious  matter  is  afforded,  and  the  object  of  the  law  like- 
wise is  important ;  and  because  the  opinion  of  the  faithful  so 
has  it. 

"  May  it  become  venial  from  the  trifling  amount  of  the 
matter  ? 

"  Yes :  because  a  single  mouthful  of  meat,  v.  g.,  is  not 
in  itself  an  important  amount  of  food  or  nourishment;  nor 
does  it  become  serious  on  account  of  the  object  of  the  law ; 
therefore,  &c. 

"  Yet  this  eating  will  everywhere  be  a  mortal  sin  on  ac- 
count of  erroneous  conscience  and  scandal,  and  on  account 
of  acting  against  the  profession  of  faith ;  for  the  people 
apprehend  the  eating  of  meat  on  a  fast-day  as  a  proof  and 
sign  of  heresy ;  and  for  this  reason  Tannerus  does  not  ad- 
mit it  as  a  liffht  matter. 


OF  FASTING.  325 

"  Observe,  that  any  one  sins  just  so  often  as  he  eats  meat 
on  a  fast-day  ;  for  the  precept  of  not  eating  meats  is  nega- 
tive. 

"  Why  does  the  Church  iiermit  only  one  refreshment  on 
a  fast-day  1 

"  St.  Thomas,  art.  6,  &c. :  because,  by  a  single  refresh- 
ment human  nature  is  saved  from  perishing,  and  at  the  same 
time  something  is  taken  away  from  lust. 

"  A  natural  day  is  meant  from  the  twelfth  hour  of  the 
night  to  the  twelfth  of  the  following  night. 

"Observe  1.  In  what  way  each  taking  of  food  without 
cause  on  a  day  of  fasting,  besides  the  refreshment  and  col- 
lation, occasions  sin,  either  mortal,  if  the  matter  be  respec- 
tively considerable,  or  venial,  if  the  matter  is  trifling. 

"  Observe  2.  That  several  small  quantities  taken  on  the 
same  fast-day  coalesce  among  themselves  by  reason  of  the 
effect  of  nutrition,  and  thus  may  constitute  matter  serious 
enough  for  mortal  sin ;  just  as  several  small  thefts  coalesce : 
hence  this  prop.  29,  was  condemned  by  Alex.  VII.  '  He  who 
frequently  eats  a  little  on  a  fast-day,  although  he  may  in  the 
end  have  eaten  a  considerable  quantity,  does  not  break  his 
fast,"'&c.  ^ 

Of  sins  respecting  the  single  refreshment.   (No.  259.) 

"  Sin  may  be  committed  in  a  threefold  way,  in  the  case 
of  the  single  refreshment:  1.  By  taking  several  refresh- 
ments, or  several  parts  of  a  refreshment :  2.  By  dividing  the 
refreshment,  or  interrupting  it  through  a  considerable  time  : 
3.  By  protracting  the  refreshment  to  too  long  a  time :  for 
thus  the  refreshment  is  virtually  multiplied. 

"  To  how  long  a  time  may  the  refreshment  be  protracted  1 

"  It  is  said  reasonably,  that  it  may  not  be  protracted 

BEYOND  TWO  HOURS.     Hcnno  adds  that  then  the  guests 

ARE  TO  BE  ADMONISHED  TO  ABSTAIN  FROM  EATING. 

"  May  any  one,  who  hastily  finishes  his  refreshment  in 
the  time  of  half  an  hour,  eat  again  after  the  space  of  one 
hour,  on  the  ground  that  the  two  hours  of  refreshment  are 
not  yet  elapsed? 

"  No ;  because  he  is  supposed  in  intention  and  fact  to  have 
entirely  finished  his  refreshment ;  so  that  the  latter  eating  is 


326  OF  FASTING. 

not  a  part  of  the  former  meal,  which  was  finished,  but  is 
rather  a  part  of  a  second  refreshment. 

"  Does  he  sin,  who  divides  his  meal  into  two  parts  by  a 
considerable  space  of  time,  when  these  two  parts  are  equiva- 
lent in  regard  to  the  food,  to  only  a  single  entire  refresh- 
ment ] 

"  Yes :  the  reason  is  because  the  unity  of  the  refresh- 
ment is  not  preserved.  Besides  not  only  are  several  entire 
meals  forbidden,  but  also  several  semi-refreshments,  or  parts 
of  a  meal. 

"  How  great  a  space  of  time  is  thought  in  this  case,  to 
make  a  considerable  interruption  ? 

"  According  to  Cozza,  the  space  of  half  an  hour  does  it ; 
especially  if  there  is  no  just  reason,  or  if  any  one  has  ceased 
without  the  intention  of  afterwards  continuing  the  refresh- 
ment he  had  commenced :  Cozza  indeed  supposes,  that  he 
who  rises  from  table  with  no  intention  and  desire  of  resuming 
the  meal,  or,  which  is  equivalent,  who  has  said  the  prayer 
of  thanks  with  the  intention  of  finishing  the  refreshment, 
cannot  resume  the  meal,  although  but  a  short  time  after; 
yet  others  think,  that  it  is  proper  if  he  has  changed  his  mind. 
See  La  Croix,  lib.  3.  p.  2,  &c. 

"For  a  just  reason,  it  will  be^lawful  without  any  sin  to 
interrupt  the  refreshment  for  a  short  time,  for  a  quarter  or 
half  hour,  says  Cozza :  and  thus,  if  any  one  has  commenc- 
ed a  meal,  and  is  called  away  for  a  purpose  of  necessity  or 
business,  he  may  on  his  return  finish  the  single  refreshment 
which  was  commenced  before. 

"  On  the  same  ground  Diana  excuses  those  who  wait  at 
table,  and  those  who  read  during  the  time  of  the  meal,  who 
take  some  food  immediately  before  the  meal :  because  these 
persons  intend  to  begin  the  refreshment  with  those  who  are 
eating,  and  after  performing  their  duty,  immediately  to  finish 
it,  &c. 

"  What  quantity  of  food  taken  above  the  refreshment  and 
the  little  collation,  is  regarded  as  a  serious  or  sufficient 
matter  for  mortal  sin :  but  what  quantity  is  a  trifling  matter  ? 

"  As  regards  an  ecclesiastical  fast,  it  is  agreed  that  there 
is  an  amount  which  may  be  considered  trifling ;  and  thus 
one  or  two  mouthsful  of  bread  is  a  small  matter ;  or  as 
Cozza  and  Antoine  say,  one  or  two  ounces,  v.  g.  a  cake  of 


OF  FASTING.  327 

a  single  quarter  which  weighs  an  ounce  and  a  half  is  a  small 
matter :  but  here  I  think  again  that  there  should  be  some 
respective  consideration. 

"  A  man's  breakfast  by  which  he  is  sufficiently  nourished 
until  noon,  is  certainly  a  serious  matter,  &c. 

"  Apples,  pears,  nuts,  grapes,  and  other  fruits,  are  also 
included  among  articles  of  food  ;  but  yet,  as  they  are  com- 
monly rather  light  diet,  a  greater  quantity  is  requisite  in 
order  to  constitute  a  serious  matter  :  it  follows,  that  it  is  not 
permitted  even  for  the  purpose  of  allaying  thirst,  to  eat  ap- 
ples, grapes,  &c.,  just  as  it  is  not  lawful  on  account  of  thirst 
to  drink  milk,  when  necessity  does  not  require  it.  See 
Cozza  more  at  length,  p.  3.  a.  1.  dub.  5.,  who,  in  the  same 
place,  num.  59,  disapproves  of  the  mode  of  chewing  apples 
and  grapes,  by  which  only  the  juice  seems  to  be  taken : 
must,  however,  is  regarded  as  simple  drink." 

Of  the  Sins  of  the  Third  and  Fourth  Refreshment.  (260.) 

"  Does  he,  who  has  violated  the  fast  by  a  second  refresh- 
ment, sin  by  taking  the  third  and  fourth  on  the  same  day  ? 

"-4.715.  Yes:  indeed  he  sins  as  often  as  he  eats  after- 
wards, or  at  least  increases  his  sin :  because  the  ecclesiasti- 
cal precept  of  the  fast  includes  the  negative :  you  shall  not 
take  several  refreshments,  which  equally  prohibits  the  third 
and  second  :  any  one  sins  just  so  often  as  he  eats  meat  on  a 
fast-day.     Thus,  Sylvius,  &c.,  Antoine,  &;c. 

"Busenbaum  thinks,  that  this  person,  although  he  has 
sinned  mortally  in  the  second  refreshment,  sins  only  venial ly 
in  the  third  and  the  rest :  but  he  does  not  give  the  reason  of 
his  peculiar  remark :  nor  can  a  solid  one  be  given,  when  the 
quantity  of  the  third  and  of  the  other  meals  is  serious  :  as 
Sylvius  teaches  with  the  passages  cited  from  La  Croix,  lib. 
3.  p.  2.  n.  1265.  The  opinion  of  Busenbaum  may  perhaps 
be  admitted  when  the  quantity  of  the  other  meals  is  so  tri- 
fling that  it  does  not  occasion  a  considerable  increase  and 
amount  of  the  first  transgression. 

"  Does  he  break  the  fast,  who  on  the  fast-day,  or  the  day 
before,  eats  more  than  usual  in  the  refreshment,  that  he  may 
more  easily  sustain  the  burden  of  fasting? 

"  Ans.  He  does  not  seem  directly  to  violate  the  precept  of 
the  fast,  because  the  quantity  of  food  in  the  refreshment,  ac- 


328  OF  FASTING. 

cording  to  S.  Thon:.,  is  not  rated  by  the  law  of  fasting. 
Bonac.  &c.,  Abul.,  &c.,  and  the  modern  Cozza  prove  this 
answer  by  this  reason:  because  this  person  observes  every- 
thing which  is  commanded,  the  single  refreshment,  the  hour, 
and  abstinence  from  meat. 

"  Nor  is  it  any  objection  that  he  sins  against  temperance : 
because  he  certainly  observes  the  precept  as  to  substance : 
it  is  not  obligatory  that  the  fast  be  an  act  supernatural  in 
substance. 

"  Some,  among  whom  is  Billuart,  teach  that  he  acts  con- 
trary to  the  law  of  the  fast,"  &c. 

Divers  objections  are  then  refuted  ;  and  at  the  close  of  his 
answers,  Peter  Dens  remarks  : 

"  This,  however,  is  readily  granted,  that  he  acts  in  some 
measure  against  the  object  of  the  law  and  against  temper- 
ance, and  in  so  far  he  may  sin.  Indeed,  a  repletion  of  this 
kind  renders  fasting  more  onerous,  when  the  food  too  much 
oppresses  the  body  and  mind,  generates  bad  humours  and 
phlegm,  whilst  a  moderate  refreshment  recruits  and  fortifies 
the  body  and  mind." 

Concerning  the  Hour  of  the  Single  Refreshment. 
(No.  261.) 

"  At  what  hour  of  the  day,  in  time  of  fasting,  is  it  proper 
to  take  refreshment  ? 

"  According  to  present  custom,  about  the  twelfth  hour,  at 
noon :  it  is  permitted  to  wait  longer,  and  anciently  it  was 
commanded  to  wait  until  evening,  afterwards  till  the  third 
hour,  as  was  said  above,  (No.  256.)  It  is  not  lawful  to  an- 
ticipate the  hour,  &c. 

"  How  great  a  sin  is  it  to  anticipate  the  hour  ? 

"  Sylvius  replies,  quest.  147,  &c.,  that  the  anticipation  of 
half  an  hour  is  a  light  offence,  but  of  two  hours,  it  is  griev- 
ous ;  because  it  is  a  considerable  anticipation ;  in  case  some 
one  should  take  refreshment  about  the  ninth  or  tenth  hour  in 
the  morning  •  So  Lessing  also,  &c.,  with  some  others. 

"  Cozza,  however,  is  not  so  indulgent,  for  he  says,  that 
to  anticipate  the  hour  of  eating,  appointed  by  custom,  by  one 
hour,  is  a  considerable  time  and  a  mortal  sin. 


OF  FASTING.  329 

"The  single  refi-eshment  may  be  anticipated  for  a  just 
cause,  for  instance,  for  the  sake  of  beginning  a  journey, 
which  will  not  admit  of  a  refreshment  at  the  proper  time, 
and  for  similar  matters  and  necessities.  Sylvius,  Cozza, 
Regin. 

"  Therefore  observe,  how  any  one  refreshing  himself  with 
meat  early  on  a  fast-day,  without  cause,  with  the* intention 
of  taking  a  second  refreshment,  commits  a  threefold  mortal 
sin,  or  one  equivalent  to  three. 

"  For  which  reason,  he  who  confesses  that  he  has  broken 
his  fast,  must  be  asked,  which,  or  what  parts  of  the  fast  he 
has  violated,  whether  without  any  just  reason,  whether  he 
has  caused  scandal,  or  an  occasion  of  sin  to  others." 

Concerning  the  Little  Collation  at  evening,  (No.  262.) 

"  The  little  collation  at  evening,  which  is  also  called  the 
little  refreshment,  the  little  supper,  and  the  collation,  anciently 
unknown,  because  the  refreshment  was  taken  about  evening, 
commenced  from  the  time  at  which  the  refreshment  began  to 
be  taken  about  noon :  the  name  has  been  derived  from  the 
collations  or  conferences  and  spiritual  lectures  in  the  even- 
ing, when  the  faithful  assembled  ;  where  they  then  first  took 
a  little  drink;  afterwards,  lest  this  drink  should  be  injurious 
to  an  empty  stomach,  they  took  a  little  food ;  by  degrees  this 
custom  increased  to  such  an  extent,  that  this  little  collation 
is  at  present  taken  so  as  to  afford  some  nourishment,  the 
church  in  so  far  relaxing  her  own  law.  No  decree  of  the 
church  has  indeed  been  promulgated  concerning  this  relax- 
ation ;  but  the  law  has  been  modified  by  custom,  with  the 
connivance  of  the  church  ;  and  this  indulgence  of  the  church 
we  learn  from  the  unanimous  interpretation  of  theologians, 
and  the  practice  of  the  faithful. 

"  The  little  collation,  therefore,  may  be  described  as  the 
taking  of  a  little  food,  in  order  that  drink  may  not  injure  the 
body,  and  that  the  body  may  at  the  same  time  be  moderately 
refreshed. 

"  It  is  to  be  observed,  that  whilst  the  little  collation  has 
indeed  been  introduced  by  custom,  it  is  only  in  so  far  lawful, 
as  the  legitimate  custom  of  the  scrupulous  faithful  approves  itT 

" How  much  food  may  be  taken  for  the  little  collation? 
28 


330  OF  FASTING. 

"  Some  have  appointed  a  certain  quantity  for  all,  or  a  fix- 
ed number  of  ounces  of  bread.  S.  Car.  Borr.  has  determin- 
ed an  ounce  and  a  half  of  bread,  Cozza  eight  ounces,  Con- 
cina  three  or  four;  but,  as  it  seems,  not  with  sufficient  pro- 
priety ;  because,  what  would  be  very  little  for  one  man,  v.  g., 
a  German,  would  be  too  much  for  another,  say,  an  Italian : 
therefore  the  constitutions  of  persons  should  be  regarded,  the 
kinds  of  food,  &c.  For  this  reason,  the  quantity  of  the  lit- 
tle collation  is  more  properly  determined  by  respect  and  pro- 
portion to  the  quantity  which  this  person  needs  for  a  mode- 
rate supper  or  refreshment ;  according  to  this  mode,  Van-den 
Bosch  restricts  the  quantity  of  the  little  collation  to  the  sev- 
enth or  sixth  part  of  a  refreshment :  Layman,  Filliuc,  Bu- 
senbaum  and  others  extend  it  to  the  fifth  or  fourth  part  of  a 
whole  supper;  and  none  are  found,  even  the  most  liberal, 
who  indulge  regularly  beyond  the  fourth  part  of  an  entire 
refreshment.  Therefore,  according  to  this  more  liberal  com- 
putation, if  I  need  for  a  meal  sixteen  ounces  of  food,  I  may 
take  four  ounces  of  bread  for  a  collation. 

"  The  custom  has  prevailed  in  monasteries  that  a  cake  of 
two  quarters  is  distributed  to  each  one  at  the  collation,  al- 
though all  do  not  eat  it  up. 

"  May  he  who  has  been  sufficiently  strengthened  by  the 
refreshment  of  dinner,  or  who  is  not  hungry  in  the  evening, 
take  the  little  evening  collation  ? 

"  Cozza  replies  affirmatively,  on  account  of  custom  ;  and 
on  account  of  continual  anxieties  which  will  occur,  says  Azo- 
rius. 

"  What  kinds  of  food  is  it  lawful  to  take  in  the  little  col- 
lation ? 

"The  custom  from  which  the  little  collation  has  its  origin 
teaches  this ;  therefore  it  is  permitted  to  take  fruits,  herbs, 
br»ad,  or  cake ;  bread  and  butter,  with  cheese  in  this  coun- 
try, says  Sylvius ;  and  he  teaches  that  it  is  not  lawful  to  take 
fish,  and  therefore  still  less  eggs,  because  they  are  solid  food, 
and  proper  for  a  perfect  meal ;  the  moderns,  Antoine,  Coz- 
za, Concina  follow  Sylvius. 

"  Diana,  although  the  prince  of  the  liberals,  earnestly  de- 
fends the  aforesaid  opinion  of  Sylvius,  and  adduces  in  its 
favour  an  army  of  doctors. 

"  It  is  indeed  true,  that  in  this  country,  the  custom  of  many 


OF  FASTING.  331 

prevails  that  they  take  a  little  fish,  with  the  bread  and  butter  ; 
but  whether  this  habit  shall  prescribe  to  the  law,  would  be 
a  matter  for  inquiry  :  certainly,  this  custom  has  not  yet  in- 
vaded the  refectories  of  the  religious,  or  of  monks,  nor  even 
every  table  of  all  the  scrupulous :  but  because  it  is  a  small 
quantity  in  food  not  forbidden  on  that  day,  it  is  little  cared 
for,  and  thus  is  used  by  many. 

"  For  the  same  reason,  hot  articles  of  food  which  have 
been  boiled  are  not  permitted :  therefore,  the  furnishing  of 
the  table  with  food  of  different  kinds,  and  hot  meats  for  the 
little  collation,  is  an  abuse,  nor  is  it  either  the  practice  of 
the  scrupulous,  nor  is  it  custom. 

"  May  not  any  one,  therefore,  who  has  been  in  the  habit 
of  taking  a  cake  and  drinking  a  pint  of  ale,  mix  them,  and 
boil  a  little  broth  from  them,  and  take  it  in  the  same  quantity 
as  a  little  collation  1 

"  No ;  because  the  form  of  the  collation  or  the  quality  of 
the  food  is  not  observed ;  for  such  a  boiled  mess  is  the  ordi- 
nary food  of  a  meal  (the  same  rule  seems  to  hold  good  in 
relation  to  minced  meats) ;  but  for  the  little  collation  custom 
permits  only  cold  things,  which  are  usually  taken  out  of  the 
refreshment ;  for  hot  articles  of  food  that  have  been  boiled 
are  more  pleasant,  and  more  nutritious.  —  La  Croix,  An- 
toine,  &c. 

"  Some,  however,  consent  in  so  far  that  if  the  quantity  of 
the  collation  does  not  exceed  (this  a'mount,)  he  does  not  sin 
mortally  :  because,  they  say,  the  collation  respects  more  the 
quantity  than  the  quality  of  the  food. — Wiggers,  Bonac,  &c. 

"  In  this  country,  certainly,  the  common  opinion  of  all 
regards  the  obligation  of  observing  the  quality  of  the  food  in 
the  collation  as  not  serious ;  whilst  indeed  the  usual  or  not 
forbidden  articles  of  food  are  taken  in  the  small  quantity  of 
the  collation." 

Concerning  the  time  of  talcing'  the  Little  Collation. 
(No.  263.) 

The  proper' time  is  about  evening.  Though  it  is  not  law- 
ful to  invert  the  order  of  the  meals  on  a  fast  day,  so  as  to 
take  the  collation  at  noon,  and  the  regular  refreshment  in  the 
evening,  yet  it  is  not  a  mortal  sin,  because  the  quantity  and 
quality  of  the  food,  and  the  times  are  observed.     It  is  no  sin 


332  OF  FASTING. 

at  all,  if  there  is  suflicient  reason  for  it,  v.  g.,  if  it  is  done  on 
account  of  a  journey,  or  of  attending  to  business  at  noon, 
say  on  a  market  day.  Also,  if  any  one  should  be  unable 
to  sleep  at  night,  unless  he  has  a  refreshment  in  the  evening, 
he  may  then  take  a  regular  supper  and  a  collation  at  noon, 
but  not  two  full  meals.  To  take  the  collation  early  in  the 
morning  is  not  orthodox,  because  it  is  anticipating  the  ap- 
pointed hour.  In  case  any  one  on  a  fast  day,  whether 
through  ignorance  or  not,  should  take  a  breakfast  equivalent 
to  a  full  meal,  he  must  restrict  himself  to  the  little  collation  ; 
but  if  the  breakfast  was  equivalent  only  to  a  collation,  he 
may  take  a  full  meal  in  the  evening,  or  even  at  noon,  if 
some  reason  requires  it.  If  the  breakfast  was  equivalent  to 
only  half  a  meal,  he  must  confine  himself  to  the  collation ; 
unless,  perchance,  this  unwonted  abstinence  should  occasion 
too  much  inconvenience  or  weakness.  These  things  are 
conformable  to  the  doctrine  of  Sylvius,  Billuart,  &c. 

"  The  insane  distinction  of  certain  casuists,  by  which  they 
liberate  him  from  the  observance  of  the  fast  who  has  mali- 
ciously violated  it,  but  not  him  who  has  done  it  without  any 
fault,  and  altogether  inadvertently,  merits  indignation ;  for  if 
the  ulterior  observance  is  useful  and  reasonable  for  one,  it 
will  be  also  for  another.     Oh,  blindness  in  morality !" 

"  If  any  one  after  dinner,  before  the  time  of  the  collation, 
takes  some  food,  he  sins ;  but  let  him  abstain  from  the  colla- 
tion :  but  if  he  takes  only  a  little  something,  La  Croix  con- 
cedes that  he  may  take  a  collation  so  much  less  in  the  even- 
ing. 

"  A  little  excess  in  the  collation  can  be  only  a  venial  fault." 

Much  has  been  said  about  the  abstemiousness  enjoined 
upon  the  faithful,  but  it  is  no  very  serious  matter  after  all. 
A  dinner,  which  may  lawfully  be  protracted  for  two  hours, 
is  certainly  sufficient  for  a  stomach  of  ordinary  capacity, 
even  if  there  were  no  additional  license  of  a  "  little  supper." 
Besides,  the  pious  man  may  gorge  himself  on  the  previous 
day,  so  as  to  fortify  himself  against  the  siege  of  the  first 
half  of  the  fast  day ;  and  it  is  not  likely  that  he  will  bo 
famished,  when  he  has  two  full  hours  by  the  watch  in  which 
to  make  amends  for  his  painful  abstinence.     There  is  not 


OF  FASTING.  333 

much  danger  that  either  priests  or  laymen  will  injure  their 
health  by  abstemiousness,  if  ihey  follow  the  rules  prescribed 
by  Doctor  Dens.  Now,  we  are  not  finding  fault ; — we  cer- 
tainly commend  them  all  for  their  good  sense  in  this  particu- 
lar ;  only  we  think  they  have  rather  a  roundabout  way  of 
getting  at  the  thing.  They  might  take  their  tea  without  all 
this  stratagem.  We  suspect  the  truth  of  the  matter  is,  that 
fasting  does  not  agree  with  their  reverences  ;  and  that  there 
is  no  sensitive  plant  so  perfect  a  "noli  me  tangere,"  as  a 
holy  priest's  stomach. 

One  or  two  more  highly  important  sections  on  fasting,  and 
we  will  vary  the  subject. 

Concerning  the  taking  of  Chocolate.    (No.  265.) 

"  Does  the  taking  of  chocolate  break  an  ecclesiastical  fast  1 

"  It  is  certain,  with  the  consent  of  all,  that  to  eat  choco- 
late undiluted  breaks  the  fast ;  because  it  is  food,  and  is  taken 
by  way  of  food. 

"The  question  is  concerning  the  drinking  of  chocolate ; 
to  wit,  when  chocolate,  mixed  with  water  and  diluted  and 
boiled,  is  drunk,  or  rather,  is  sucked. 

"  Cozza  and  La  Croix  propose  this  as  a  question  contro- 
verted by  their  patrons  on  both  sides,  whom  they  cite. 

"Benedict  XIV.,  the  Supreme  Pontiff,  has  published  a 
lucid  dissertation  upon  this  question,  who,  however,  resolves 
that  it  is  more  safe  to  abstain  from  chocolate  on  a  fast  day ; 
and  to  him  we  adhere  with  Billuart. 

"  The  reason  is,  because  such  a  potion  in  itself,  and  more 
especially  serves  for  nourishment,  and  not  properly  for  cool- 
ing, or  for  quenching  thirst ;  for  it  is  a  kind  of  hot  concoc- 
tion. This  is  confirmed  from  the  fact  that  by  this  potion 
weak  persons  are  nourished,  &c. 

^^Obj.L  A  drink  or  a  liquid  does  not  break  a  fast  ; 
therefore,  &c.  , 

"  Ans.  The  drinking  of  chocolate  is  not  a  mere  drink, 
according  to  what  has  been  said  above. 

"  Observe  that  this  axiom,  '  a  liquid  does  not  break  the 
fast,'  is  not  universally  true ;  for  milk,  honey,  and  similar 
liquid  things  when  taken  break  the  fast. 
28* 


334  OF  FASTING. 

"  Ohj.  II.  A  single  ounce  of  chocolate,  as  it  is  ordinarily 
taken,  affords  very  little  nourishment. 

"  Ans^  We  do  not  dispute  that  the  smallness  of  the  matter 
may  excuse  from  mortal  sin :  for  this  reason,  Cozza,  al- 
though a  patron  of  the  opposite  opinion,  cautions  that  the 
drink  of  chocolate  be  not  taken  oftener  than  once  on  a  fast- 
day. 

"  Finally,  Antonius  de  Leone,  in  Cozza,  says  that  choco- 
late is  very  nutritious. 

**  Obj.  III.  Strong  beer  is  also  a  concoction  from  water 
and  the  flour  of  grain :  but  this  drink  does  not  break  the 
fast :  therefore,  neither  a  concoction  of  chocolate. 

"  Ans.  I  deny  the  assertion :  for  beer  is  only  an  extract 
from  grain  :  for  in  clarified  ale,  there  is  no  gross  matter  of 
the  grain,  but  only  the  spirit  of  the  grain  :  and  hence,  it  is 
a  mere  drink,  which  by  accident  nourishes  but  little ;  which 
is  plain  from  the  fact  that  they  who  drink  freely  without  food 
injure  their  constitution.  Indeed,  he  who  makes  this  objec- 
tion does  not  understand  the  art  of  brewing  ;  gruel  is  con- 
cocted of  meal  and  a  liquid,  but  not  beer. 

"  Obj.  IV.  At  Rome,  under  the  eyes  of  the  Supreme  Pon- 
tiff, the  use  of  chocolate  is  permitted ;  therefore,  &c. 

"  Ans.  A  learned  man  has  told  me  that  when  he  was 
himself  at  Rome,  he  made  diligent  inquiry  concerning  this 
practice:  and  he  has  assured  me,  that  there,  some  use  it, 
but  others  do  not. 

"  The  Supreme  Pontiffs  perhaps  permit  it  for  just  reasons  ; 
perhaps  in  due  course  of  time  they  will  forbid  it :  and  in 
this  way  the  custom  obtained  at  Rome,  and  almost  every- 
where, that  when  a  dispensation  was  given  for  eating  meat 
in  Lent,  they  mixed  the  eating  of  fish  in  the  refreshment 
with  the  eating  of  meat ;  and  yet  the  Supreme  Pontiff,  Bene- 
dict XIV.,  declared,  that  this  custom  was  and  always  had  been 
an  abuse. 

"  Hence,  Concina  lays  down  this  rule :  a  probable  opinion 
permitted  and  tolerated  by  the  Pope  is  not  considered  im- 
plicitly approved :  for  many  propositions  have  been  con- 
demned only  after  a  long  time :  so  too,  the  husbandman  has 
permitted  tares  to  grow." 


OF  FASTING.  335 

Of  Causes  which  excuse  from  Fasting.    (No.  2G6.) 

"  These  three  or  four  causes  are  usually  assigned  : 

"  1.  Inability,  v.  g.,  bodily  infirmity.  2.  Necessity,  as  heavy 
labour.  3.  Piety,  or  a  greater  good,  such  as  troublesome 
waiting  on  a  sick  person,  performed  without  sleep.  4.  The 
dispensation  of  a  superior.  Some  reduce  all  these  causes  to 
one,  inability  or  impossibility. 

"  It  is  to  be  well  observed,  that  as  fasting  contains  three 
parts,  some  causes  Tnay  excuse  from  the  observance  of  one 
part,  yet  not  from  the  observance  of  the  other  parts ;  v.  g., 
one  who  has  a  dispensation  to  eat  meat,  may  not,  therefore, 
take  several  refreshments,  or  anticipate  the  hour ;  thus  the 
cause  of  labour  which  permits  several  refreshments,  does 
not  permit  the  eating  of  meat ;  likewise,  some  reason  for  an- 
ticipating the  hour  does  not  permit  the  eating  of  meat,  nor 
always  several  refreshments,  &c. 

"  Observe,  moreover,  that  the  cause  ought  to  be  reasonable 
and  proportionate:  so  that  a  greater  cause  be  required  for 
the  eating  of  meat,  than  for  the  anticipation  of  the  refresh- 
ment. 

"  Politeness  does  not  excuse  from  fasting  in  order  that  you 
may  eat  with  a  friend. 

*'  The  multiplicity  of  excuses  from  fasting,  which  casuists 
and  probabilists  fabricate,  so  that  there  is  scarcely  a  man 
living,  who  may  not  apply  some  one  to  himself,  merits  in- 
dignation rather  than  theological  refutation.  For  Concina 
on  fasting,  quotes  from  Hurtadus,  how  Pasqualigus  enume- 
rates about  fifty  conditions  or  orders  of  men,  whom  he  de- 
clares to  be  free  from  the  command  of  fasting. 

"  Who  then  are  held  under  obligation  by  the  ecclesiastical 
law  of  fasting? 

"  All  baptized  persons  who  have  attained  to  the  use  of 
reason,  unless  they  should  be  excused  from  some  claim,  or 
be  free  from  the  whole  or  from  a  part. 

"  Heretics  also  ? 

*'  Ans.  Yes,  if  they  are  baptized  ;  because  they  are 
SUBJECT  TO  THE  Church,  which  docs  not  seem  to  relax  her 
law  in  their  favour. 

"  Unbaptized  infidels  are  not  under  obligation,  because  they 
are  not  subject  to  the  Church." 


330  OF  FASTING. 

The  following  sections  on  this  subject,  treat  of  particular 
cases,  when  the  excuse  from  fasting  is  valid,  and  when  the 
contrary. 

A  journey  undertaken  from  a  proper  motive,  not  for  the 
purpose  of  eluding  the  precept  of  the  Church,  excuses  from 
the  single  refreshment  and  from  the  hour,  but  not  from  ab- 
stinence from  meat.  The  journey  must  be  not  a  mere  ex- 
cursion of  pleasure — riding  on  horseback,  or  in  a  carriage, 
does  not  ordinarily  excuse  from  fasting — but  when  the  jour- 
ney is  laborious,  difficult,  and  very  fatiguing,  especially  for 
one  who  is  not  used  to  ride  on  horseback,  then  he  is  not 
obliged  to  fast.     Pedestrians  need  not  fast. 

The  age  at  which  the  obligation  of  the  ecclesiastical  fast 
begins,  is  fixed  at  about  seven :  but  parents,  who  deprive 
their  children  of  meat  at  an  earlier  age,  in  order  that  they 
may  from  infancy  learn  to  be  subject  to  the  rulers  of  the 
Church,  are  commended. 

"The  perfect  ecclesiastical  fast,  according  to  the  three 
parts  explained  above.  No.  255,  obliges  those  who  have  com- 
pleted their  twenty-first  year. 

"  Observe  1  :  that  young  men  of  this  kind,  before  the 
age  of  twenty-one,  may  be  obliged,  by  the  natural  law,  to 
some  fasts,  as  proper  and  ordinary  means  against  the  lusts 
and  sins  of  the  flesh :  hence,  the  custom  of  the  pious  ob- 
serves that,  at  the  discretion  of  the  confessor,  they  assume 
certain  fasts  in  Lent. 

"  Observe  2 :  that  this  junior  age  does  not  excuse  from  a  fast 
that  is  due  from  some  other  cause,  v.  g.,  from  a  vow,  or 
from  some  sacramental  satisfaction  which  has  been  imposed, 
or  for  enjoying  a  jubilee,  &c."  (No.  270) 

No  age  has  been  fixed  at  which  the  law  of  ecclesiastical 
fasting  ceases  to  be  obligatory  :  but  when  people  are  believed 
to  be  so  infirm  or  weak  as  to  be  disqualified  from  fasting, 
they  are  excused. 

Pregnant  and  nursing  women  aie  excused  from  fasting, 
but  are  not  at  liberty  to  eat  meat  on  a  fast  day. 

Beggars  may  eat  whenever  they  have  a  chance,  provided 
they  cannot  procure  enough  at  once  to  make  a  full  meal ; 
but  if  they  can,  they  are  not  excused  from  fasting,  unless 
the  dry  bread  and  vegetables,  which  they  have,  should  not 
sufficiently  recruit  them  when  debilitated  by  hunger. 


OF  FASTING.  337 

Works   of  mercy,   corporeal   and   spiritual,   which   are 
incompatible    with    fasting,    absolve    from    the    obligation 
(No.  271*.) 

The  power  of  granting  a  dispensation  from  the  ecclesias 
tical  law  of  fasting,  belongs   primarily  to   the  Pope ;    but 
bishops,  regular  superiors,  abbots,  priors,  but  neither  the  sub 
prior,  nor  th*e  lady  abbess,  says  Cozza,  if  the  prior  is  pre 
sent,  may  afford  dispensation. 

It  is  customary  for   parish  priests  to  grant  this  license 
at  least  when  the  Bishop  is  not  present.     Confessors  or  phy 
sicians  have  no  such  authority  ;  they  can  only  declare  that  a 
just  cause  subsists. 

"  May  those  who  have  a  dispensation  to  eat  meat  on  the 
same  day  eat  fish  also  ?" 

This  weighty  question  is  controverted.  On  the  one  hand, 
Sylvius  says,  that,  regarding  the  nature  of  the  thing,  they 
may ;  but  Pope  Benedict  XIV.,  the  erudite  author  of  the 
brilliant  treatise  on  the  lawfulness  of  drinking  chocolate  on  a 
fast  day,  says  that  it  is  not  lawful  to  eat  fish  and  meat  at 
the  same  feast,  when  a  dispensation  has  been  granted  only 
with  reference  to  meat ;  and  his  Holiness  in  divers  Briefs 
has  laid  down  the  following  conclusions  in  this  momentous 
question,  equalled  only  by  the  awful  controversy,  which  con- 
vulsed the  Lilliputian  empire  in  the  days  of  Gulliver,  when 
the  Emperor  and  Nobles  were  divided  on  the  question  of  the 
orthodox  mode  of  breaking  eggs. 

"  1.  One  who  has  a  dispensation  to  eat  meat  on  a  day  of 
fasting,  may  not  at  the  same  feasts  eat  meat  and  fish ;  and 
this  under  grievous  sin,  not  even  on  Lord's  days  in  Lent. 
Put  oysters  and  crabs,  even. delicate  ones,  under  the  same 
rule  with  fish,  to  which  add  shell-fish. 

"  2.  Neither  may  he  eat  meat  in  the  evening  collation, 
riot  even  in  that  small  quantity  which  is  allowed  in  other 
food. 

"  3.  Neither  may  this  dispensed  person  on  this  account 
anticipate  the  hour  nor  take  several  meals,  &c. 

"  4.  One  who  has  a  dispensation  to  eat  eggs,  may  also 
eat  fish. 

"  By  these  aforesaid  rules  they  are  not  bound,  who  are 
grievously  sick  or  disqualified  by  a  similar  necessity,"  &c., 
&c.,  No.  273. 


338  OF  FASTING. 

No.  275,  treats  of  the  sins  of  others  in  the  cause  of  fast- 
ing. 

It  is  not  proper  to  give  food  on  a  fast-day  to  a  person,  if 
you  know  that  he  will  violate  the  fast;  you  may  not  offer 
such  a  one  a  breakfast  or  a  supper.  In  the  same  way,  it 
follows  that  tavern-keepers  may  not,  in  a  Catholic  country, 
offer  meat  to  heretics  on  a  forbidden  day ;  and  if  they  ask 
for  it,  they  are  to  be  told  that  the  laws  of  the  country  forbid 
it,  and  that  as  they  are  bound  to  obey  the  other  laws  of  the 
land,  they  must  obey  the  law  concerning  fasting  too.  But 
in  case  of  war,  when  the  armies  of  the  heretics  occupy  the 
country,  then  the  laws  of  the  church  yield  to  fear  and 
necessity ;  so  too  when  the  country  is  ruled  by  heretics. 
Reginald  excuses  servants  who  prepare  forbidden  dishes  for 
their  masters,  on  a  fast-day,  because  they  do  it  in  obedience 
to  orders,  but  Peter  Dens  advises  them  In  this  case  to  leave 
such  families  and  seek  employment  elsewhere,  unless  other 
just  reasons  should  be  in  the  way. 

The  following  question  and  answer  closes  the  chapter  on 
fasting : 

"  What  is  to  be  done,  when  you  see  any  one  through 
ignorance  or  inadvertence  eating  something  on  a  fast-day, 
contrary  to  the  precept  of  the  fast  ? 

"  You  are  bound  by  a  debt  of  legal  justice  to  remind  him 
of  his  obligation,  or  to  hinder  him,  &;c. 

"Sylvius  wishes  to  excuse  from  mortal  sin,  those  who, 
by  an  imaginary  claim,  suppose  themselves  to  be  excused 
from  fasting,  when  gross  ignorance  does  not  concur:  but 
La  Croix  is  more  rigid  in  this  case." 

One  of  the  marks  by  which  Paul  designates  the  great 
apostasy,  which  was  to  afflict  the  church  in  the  latter  times, 
is  ABSTINENCE  FROM  MEATS.  Be  it  remembered,  the  apos- 
tle does  not  condemn  fasting,  nor  does  he  say  that  fasting 
would  be  a  peculiarity  of  the  man  of  sin.  It  certainly  is 
abundantly  evident  from  the  doctrines  inculcated  in  the 
above  sections  that  a  fast  in  the  Romish  Church  is  a  perfect 
farce ;  on  the  most  solemn  day  of  ecclesiastical  fasting,  the 
faithful  have  full  license  to  eat  one  hearty  meal,  which  may 
be  protracted  to  the  length  of  two  hours ;  and  they,  who 


OF  FASTING.  339 

cannot  appease  the  cravings  of  hunger  in  that  time  must 
certainly  be  tormented  with  ravenous  appetites !  Besides 
this,  they  may  have  a  "  little  supper,"  so  that  there  is  very 
little  danger  that  the  "good  Catholic'''  will  spend  a  sleepless 
night,  on  account  of  the  gnawings  of  hunger !  But,  whilst 
it  is  only  a  venial  sin  if  he  offends  against  Temperance  on 
a  fast-day,  by  glutting  himself  with  lawful  food,  if  he  eats 
MEAT  on  that  day,  he  commits  mortal  sin ;  i.  e.  an  offence, 
which  entails  damnation  upon  his  soul,  unless  confession  be 
made,  penance  duly  performed,  and  absolution  from  a  Holy 
Priest  received !  So  exactly  does  the  mark  of  the  beast, 
ABSTINENCE "  FROM  MEATS,  designate  the  Church  of  Rome 
as  the  Man  of  Sin.  It  is  not  an  uncommon  thing,  for  Pa- 
pists to  endeavour  to  raise  a  smile  at  the  application  of  such 
terms  as  the  above  to  Holy  Mother ;  but  where  will  they 
find  another  to  answer  the  description  which  the  Bible  gives  1 
Observe,  this  apostasy  is  to  grow  out  of  the  Church  of 
Christ  ;  it  is  to  be  literally  an  apostasy ;  where  then  we 
ask  again,  can  another  church  professing  to  be  Christian,  be 
found,  that  shall  answer  this  description  of  the  Apostle, 
"  forbidding  to  marry  and  commanding  to  abstain  from 


MEATS  J 


7" 


The  remainder  of  Vol.  IV.,  treats  of  sins  of  licentious- 
ness. It  would  not  be  decent  to  translate  even  the  least 
offensive  of  these  chapters.  The  most  outrageous  forms  of 
bestiality  which  it  is  possible  for  iniquity  to  assume  are 
gravely  discussed,  and  held  up  with  most  revolting  particu- 
larity before  students  of  divinity,  who  are  under  a  vow  of 
chastity  and  perpetual  celibacy.     The  filthiness  of  this  slimy 


340  DE  POLLUTIONS. 

puddle  of  Romish  casuistry  is  so  offensive,  that  I  must  be 
excused  from  stirring  the  scum  ;  I  cannot  permit  its  effluvia 
even  from  a  distance  to  annoy  the  mental  olfactories  of  my 
reader  by  a  translation,  but  in  order  to  furnish  evidence  of 
the  vileness  of  this  theology  I  I  will  present  a  few  extracts 
from  the  original  Latin. 

De  modo  contra  naturam.    (No.  295.) 

"  I.  Quinta  species  luxuries  contra  naturam  committitur 
quando  qnidem  copula  masculi  Jit  in  vase  femincB  natu- 
rally sed  indebito  modo,  v.  g.  stando,  aut  dum  vir  succum- 
bit,  vel  a  retro  feminam  cognoscit,  sicut  equi  congrediuntur, 
quamvis  in  vase  femineo. 

"  11.  Possunt  autem  hi  modi  inducere  peccatum  mortale 
juxta  periculum  perdendi  semen,  eo  quod  scilicet  semen  viri 
communiter  non  possit  apte  effundi  usque  in  matricem 
feminse. 

"  III.  Et  quamvis  forte  conjuges  dicant  quod  periculum 
diligenter  prsecaveant,  illi  interim  lascivi  modi  a  gravi 
veniali  excusari  non  debent,  nisi  forte  propter  impotentiam, 
V.  g.  ob  curvitatem  uxoris,  nequeat  servari  naturalis  situs  et 
modus,  qui  est  ut  mulier  succumbat  viro." 

De  Pollutione.    (No.  296.) 

^  tP  -tC*  T?*  *??■  vf- 

"  Quid  agere  debet  is,  qui  sub  pollutione  in  somno  in- 
ch oata  evigilat  ? 

"  Evigilans  non  potest  ei  ullum  consensum  prtebere,  sed 
potius  dissensum  seu  displicentiam  voluntatis  formare  debet. 

"  An  tenetur  illam  pollutionem  in  somno  inceptam,  mox 
ut  evigilat,  vi  cohibere,  suumque  corpus  comprimere,  ne 
continuetur  in  vigilia  ? 

"  R.  cum  Antoine :  tenetur,  saltem  ut  pollutio  non  conti- 
nuetur per  effusionem  seminis  necdum  e  lumbis  vel  ex  testi- 
culis  extravasati.  Sanchez,  Billuart,  aliique  videntur  per- 
mittere  continuationem  ob  periculum  infirmitatis ;  sed 
omnino  puto,  eos  id  dicere  solummodo  de  semine  jam  extra- 
vasato,  nimirum  ut  exterius  effluat :  alioquin  non  licet  pro- 
movere  formalem  pollutionem,  nequidrm  id  evadendam 
mortem. 


DE  BESTIALITATE.  341 

"  Notat  Neesen  difTicilem  esse  correctionem  eorum,  qui 
dediti  sunt  huic  vitio  pollutiones." 

.The  atrocity  of  these  and  similar  passages  can  be  appre- 
ciated only,  when  we  bear  in  mind  that  the  most  revolting 
questions  concerning  these  subjects  are  put  to  penitents  of 
every  age  and  sex  at  the  confessional,  whenever  the  Priest 
deems  it  expedient. 

"Confessarius  prudens  omnem  evadet  invidiam  hac 
methodo :  dum  puella  confitetur  se  esse  fornicatam,  confes- 
sarius  petat,  an  prima  vice,  qua  simile  peccatum  commisit, 
exposuerit  circumstantiam  amissse  virginitatis. 

"  Si  respondeat  categorice,  ita,  vel  non,  cessat  difficultas ; 
et  quidem  si  jam  sint  primae  vices  statim  reponet,  jam  fuisse 
primas  vices,  adeoque  solum  ei  dici  debet,  ut  conteratur  de 
ilia  circumstantia,  et  earn  confiteatur :  si  taceat,  instruatur, 
illam  circumstantiam  tutiijs  semel  exprimendam,  adeoque  si 
id  nunquam  fecerit,  jam  desuper  doleat  et  se  accuset,"  (No. 
287.) 

In  No.  293,  De  Bestialitate,  the  following  passage  occurs ; 

"Ad  hoc  crimen  reducitur  congressus  carnalis  cum 
dsemone  in  corpore  assumpto :  quod  scelus  aggravatur  per 
circumstantiam  contra  religionem,  quatenus  includit  socie- 
tatem  cum  dsemone;  ideoque  gravis  est  et  gravissimum 
peccatum  contra  naturam :  consideranda  est  etiam  forma 
corporis  vel  hominis,  vel  bestise,  in  qua  apparet  daemon  ; 
item  repr-cEsentatio  persona)  virgin  is,  monialis,  &c.  Veriim 
plerumque*  prcesumendiim  est,  talia  solum  fieri  per  fortem 
imaginationem,  qua  decipiuntur  homines,"  &c. 


29 


342      WORSHIP  AND  INVOCATION  OF  SAINTS. 


CHAPTER  XXXIII. 

Vol.  V.  commences  with  a  Treatise  on  the  Incarnation  of 
Christ.     The  24th  No.  treats 

Op  the  Worship  and  Invocation  of  the  Saints. 

"  Prove  that  the  Saints  in  heaven  are  to  be  worshipped 
and  honoured  with  the  veneration  of  dulia. 

"  Ans.  It  is  proved  from  this  that  they  have  supernatural 
excellence  and  are  the  friends  of  God :  and  therefore  a  rea- 
son for  their  worship  truly  subsists. 

"The  same  is  proved  from  this  that  the  church  has  insti- 
tuted festivals  of  the  Saints ;  and  therefore,  the  worship 
of  the  Saints  may  be  said  to  be  a  commanded  duty. 

"  Finally,  it  is  proved  from  the  Old  Testament ;  for  Abra- 
ham, Jacob,  Samson,  and  others,  exhibited  reverence  or 
honour  to  angels  :  therefore,  as  men  are  blessed  as  the  angels 
of  God,  (as  is  said.  Matt.  xxii.  v.  30.),  it  follows  also,  that 
their  worship  is  lawful. 

**  Is  this  worship  of  the  Saints  absolute  or  respective? 

"  It  is  absolute :  because  it  is  exhibited  on  account  of  the 
excellence,  intrinsic,  and  peculiar  to  themselves :  yet  it  may 
also  be  called  respective,  inasmuch  as  God  is  honoured  in 
the  Saints. 

"  Ohj.  I.  1  Tim.  i.  17,  it  is  said,  to  the  only  God  he 
honour  and  glory,  therefore,  not  to  the  Saints. 

^^Ans.  The  worship  of  latria  not  of  dulia  is  spoken  of 
in  the  text ;  otherwise,  the  apostle  would  contradict  himself, 
writing  to  the  Romans  ;  ii.  v.  10 ;  hut  glory  and  honour  to 
every  one  that  worketh  good. 

"  Ohj.  II.  MardochsBus,  Esther  xiii.  14.,  gives  as  a  rea- 
son why  he  would  not  rise  up  before  Aman  :  I  feared  lest 
I  might  transfer  the  honour  of  my  God  to  a  man  ;  there- 
fore, &c. 

"  Ans.  Aman  had  required  honour  as  though  he  were  in 
himself  somewhat  of  a  divinity  :  for  when  the  Gentiles  were 
promoted,  they  supposed  that  divinity  was  communicated  to 
themselves  ;  and  thus  we  see  that  the  Caesars  after  their 
death  were  reckoned  among  the  number  of  the  gods. 


WORSHIP  AND  INVOCATION  OF  SAINTS.     343 

"  ObJ.  III.  Apoc.  xix.  10.  The  angel  refused  to  be  wor- 
shipped by  John,  saying,  See  thou  do  it  not;  therefore, 
&c. 

"A/15.  The   angel   refused   this   on   account   of   the 

GREAT   HOLINESS    OF    JoHN. 

"  Are  the  Saints  to  be  invoked  by  us  1 

"  I  answer,  with  Council  of  Trent,  sess.  25.  Concerning 
the  Invocation  of  the  Saints :  *  that  it  is  good  and  useful  to 
supplicate  them,  and  to  fly  to  their  prayers,  power,  and  aid  : 
but  that  they  who  deny  that  the  Saints  are  to  be  invoked, 
or  who  assert  that  they  do  not  pray  for  men,  or  that  their 
invocation  of  them  is  idolatry,  hold  an  impious  opinion.' 

"  It  is  proved  also  from  Gen.  xlviii.  16.,  where  Jacob  in- 
vokes his  own  angel :  besides  that  angels  have  conferred 
many  benefits  is  plain  from  various  passages,  and  especially 
from  the  history  of  Tobias  :  but  there  is  the  same  reason  for 
the  invocation  of  beatified  men  as  of  angels  :  and  thus,  also, 
2  Mace.  XV.  14.,  it  is  plain  that  the  Saints  which  are  still  in 
limbus  pray  for  men :  for  it  is  there  said  concerning  Jere- 
miah :  this  is  he  that  prayeth  much  for  the  people :  final- 
ly, according  to  sectarians  themselves,  it  is  proper  to  call 
upon  Saints  whilst  they  are  still  upon  earth  to  pray  for  us, 
(thus  God,  Exod.  xxxii.  14.,  was  appeased  by  the  prayer  of 
Moses  for  the  people) ;  therefore,  it  is  more  proper  to  pray 
to  the  Saints  who  are  reigning  with  Christ,  as  to  those  who 
are  more  closely  connected  with  God  in  heaven." 

The  objections  against  the  Invocation  of  Saints  are  solved, 
(No.  25.) 

"  Obf.  I.  1  Tim.  ch.  ii.  5.,  it  is  said :  one  mediator  of 
God  and  men,  the  man  Christ  Jesus;  therefore  the  Saints 
are  not  our  mediators. 

"  Ans.  I  make  a  distinction  in  the  inference :  I  entirely 
agree,  that,  therefore,  the  Saints  are  not  the  principal  media- 
tors ;  for  Christ  alone  is  the  one  who  asks  in  his  own  name, 
as  he  who  by  his  own  proper  merit  renders  God  propitious 
to  men :  I  deny  the  inference,  that,  therefore,  the  Saints  are 
not  secondary  mediators,  and  participatively,  who  relying 
on  the  merits  of  Christ  beseech  God  for  us ;  and  thus,  in- 
deed, Gal.  iii.  19.,  the  name  of  mediator  is  given  to  Moses, 
and  in  this  sense,  also,  the  Divine  Virgin  is  called  our  life 


344     WORSHIP  AND  INVOCATION  OF  SAINTS. 

and  hope  :  but  when  we  ask  of  her,  give  salvation  to  thy 
servants,  it  is  meant  that  she  give  it  by  obtaining  it ;  and 
thus,  the  apostle,  1  Cor.  ix.  22.  ventures  to  say  of  himself: 
that  I  might  save  all. 

"  Nor  does  this  diminish  the  dignity  and  power  of  Christ : 
because  the  Saints  are  invoked  as  mediators  with  the  media- 
tor and  God,  says  St.  Thomas :  so  that  they  themselves  by 
their  intercession  may  supply  that  which  is  wanting  to  the 
weakness  of  our  prayers. 

"  Ohj.  II.  The  Saints  have  no  knowledge  of  our  pray- 
ers ;  therefore,  they  are  invoked  in  vain. 

"  Ans.  I  deny  the  antecedent :  because  the  Saints  know 
all  things  which  pertain  to  their  state  in  the  Word ;  and, 
therefore,  they  see  our  prayers  directed  to  themselves  in  the 
Word  or  in  God,  as  in  a  mirror  containing  all  things,  just  as 
the  angels  have  knowledge  of  our  prayers. 

"  You  may  urge ;  Eccl.  ix.  5.,  it  is  said,  the  dead  know 
nothing  more;  therefore,  the  Saints  do  not  know  our 
prayers. 

"The  best  solution  is  that  these  are  the  words  op 

THE  foolish  and  OF  THOSE  WHO  SAY  THAT  THE  SOUL 
PERISHES    WITH   THE    BODY.* 

"  Ohj,  III.  All  benefits  come  forth  from  God  to  us,  who 
IS  prepared  to  give  them ;  therefore  we  ask  these  things  of 
the  Saints  improperly. 

"  Ans.  I  deny  the  inference  :  because  we  do  not  ask  any- 
thing of  the  Saints  in  excluding  God,  but  rather  that  through 
the  Saints,  as  through  intercessors,  we  may  receive  them 
from  God. 

"  But  that  we  implore  the  clemency  of  God  through  the 
Saints,  is  not  through  the  defect  of  the  power  or  mercy  of 
God :  but  because  God  is  willing  to  grant  certain  blessings 
only  through  the  Saints :  that  thus  the  Saints  may  be  hon- 
oured and  God  in  them ;  or,  also,  that  thus  subordination 
and  order  in  second  causes  may  be  preserved,  says  St. 
Thomas. 

"  Generally  as  to. these  and  other  objections  you  will  con- 
vince sectarians  that  all  these  things  do  not  hinder  us  from 

*  Not  a  word  is  said  in  the  context,  which  affords  the  least  ground 
for  such  a  supposition.     My  reader  can  refer  to  the  passage. 


WORSHIP  AND  INVOCATION  OF  SAINTS.      345 

imploring  the  prayers  of  the  living :  therefore,  neither  can 
they  be  any  objection  to  our  seeking  the  suffrages  of  the 
Saints  in  heaven. 

"  Is  the  invocation  of  the  Saints  a  commanded  duty  ? 

"  Some  reply  that  it  is  neither  necessary  to  salvation,  nor 
is  it  enjoined  upon  every  one :  yet  Sylvius,  Billuart,  &c., 
think  more  probably  that  it  is  a  commanded  duty :  concern- 
ing the  Blessed  Virgin,  at  least  this  seems  to  be  sufficiently 
inferred  from  the  Holy  Fathers  and  the  common  opinion  of 
the  faithful." 

Concerning  the  Worship  of  Images.   (No.  26.) 

"  What  is  meant  by  an  image  ? 

"  A  similitude  or  representation  of  some  existing  things 
expressed  for  that  thing  as  a  copy :  for  it  is  called  an 
image  from  imitating ;  because  it  represents  the  thing  which 
it  imitates. 

"  How  does  it  differ  from  an  idol  ? 

"  Because  an  idol  is  a  likeness  representing  that,  which 
either  simply  does  not  exist,  or  certainly  is  not  such  as  that 
which  is  worshipped  :  but  an  image  is  the  similitude  of  a 
thing  which  really  exists,  v.  g.  of  a  man :  hence  the  apostle 
says  concerning  an  idol,  1  Cor.  viii.  4 ;  because  we  hiow 
that  an  idol  is  nothing  in  the  world  ;  nothing  certainly  in 
its  representation :  because  it  is  no  divinity  in  itself  or  in  its 
own  prototype. 

"  Prove  that  the  images  of  Christ  and  the  Saints  are  to  be 
worshipped. 

"  Ans.  It  is  PROVED  in  the  first  place  from  the  Council 
OF  Trent,  (I  !)sess.  above  cited,  where  it  will  say  against 
sectarians,  *  that  the  images  of  Christ  and  of  the  Virgin 
Mother  of  God  and  of  the  other  Saints,  are  to  be  kept  and 
retained  especially  in  temples,  and  that  due  honour  and 
veneration  are  to  be  paid  to  them.' 

"  The  Seventh  general  Synod  or  the  II.  Nicene,  under 
Adrian  I.,  had  decreed  the  same  against  the  Iconoclast  here- 
tics, saying,  that  salutation  and  honorary  adoration  were  to 
be  exhibited  to  the  images  of  Christ  and  the  Saints. 

"  It  is  proved  further :  because  proper  veneration  was  due 
and  was  given  to  the  ark  of  the  covenant  in  the  old  law; 
because  it  bore  the  image  of  heavenly  things ;  although  the 
29* 


34G      WORSHIP  AND  INVOCATION  OF  SAINTS. 

ark  in  itself  was  something  inanimate  and  destitute  of  in- 
trinsic holiness:  hence,  concerning  it,  it  is  said  literally, 
Ps.  xcviii.  5.,  adore  his  footstool,  for  it  is  holy  ;  therefore, 
&c. 

"  Finally,  it  is  proved  also  from  reason :  because  the 
honour  of  an  image  in  itself  redounds  to  the  prototype ;  just 
as  on  the  contrary,  an  insult  offered  to  a  royal  statue  re- 
dounds to  the  king,  as  S.  Amb.  remarks,  Serm.  x.  on  Ps. 
cxviii. 

"Are  images  op  God  and  of  the  Most  Holy 
Trinity  proper? 

"  Yes  :  although  this  is  not  so  certain  as  concerning  the 
images  of  Christ  and  the  Saints ;  as  this  was  determined  at 
a  later  period, 

"  But  it  is  to  be  observed  that  the  divinity  cannot  be  de- 
picted, but  those  forms  are  depicted  under  which  God  has 
sometimes  appeared,  or  to  which  divine  attributes  are  paid 
in  some  similitude :  thus  God  the  Father  is  represented 
under  the  form  of  an  old  man  :  because  Dan.  vii.  9.  we  read 
that  he  appeared  thus  :  and  the  ancient  of  days  sat ;  and 
the  Holy  Ghost  under  the  form  of  a  dove  ;  because  he  ap- 
peared thus,  Matt.  iii.  16 :  He  saw  the  Spirit  of  God  de- 
scending like  a  dove  ;  or  under  the  form  of  cloven  tongues, 
such  as  he  appeared  on  the  day  of  Pentecost,  Acts  ii.  3. 
And  there  appeared  unto  them  cloven  tongues  as  it  were  of 
fire. 

"  Therefore,  images  of  this  kind  are  not  to  be  painted 
according  to  any  one's  will,  but  only  under  these  forms  in 
which  they  have  sometimes  appeared. 

"  It  is  proved  by  an  equal  reason  :  for  just  as  it  is  proper 
to  describe  these  histories  and  apparitions  with  words,  thus 
also  with  colours :  for  pictures  as  well  as  words  are  signs  of 
things. 

"  With  this  also  agrees  the  condemnation  of  prop.  26,  by 
Alexander  VIII.,  A.  D.  1690  :  '  It  is  a  sin  to  place  a  likeness 
of  God  the  Father  in  a  Christian  temple.' 

"  Obj.  Exod.  XX.  4.,  God  commanded :  thou  shalt  not 
make  to  thyself  a  graven  thing,  nor  the  likeness  of  any- 
thing  that  is  in  heaven  above,  or  in  the  earth  beneath; 
therefore  God  himself  has  forbidden  images. 

*'  Ans.  1.  Some  who  think  that  under  the  old  law  it  was  for- 


WORSHIP  AND  INVOCATION  OF  SAINTS.      347 

bidden  to  make  images  on  account  of  the  proneness  of  the 
Jews  to  idolatry,  say  that  this  precept  is  partly  moral,  inas- 
much as  it  forbids  idolatry ;  partly  ceremonial  in  so  far  as  it 
forbids  every  image :  and  in  this  respect  it  ceases  in  the  new 
law  so  much  the  more,  because  its  cause  now  no  longdr 
exists. 

"  Ans.  2.  That  idols  are  only  forbidden  to  be  made  such 
as  the  Gentiles  made,  to  which  they  paid  divine  honour; 
hence  it  is  added:  that  thou  may  est  adore  them;  viz.,  as 
gods. 

"  But  that  all  images  are  not  forbidden  is  plain  from  the 
fact  that  by  the  command  of  God  the  images  of  two  Cheru- 
bim were  made  about  the  ark. 

"  Finally,  you  will  generally  confound  heretics  from 
NATURAL  REASON,  which  dictates  that  it  is  proper  to  make 
pictures  of  parents,  kings,  &c.,  and  to  honour  them  with 
civil  worship ;  therefore,  much  more  is  it  right  to  make  and 
to  honour  the  images  of  the  Saints." 

N.  B.  When  heretics  make  pictures  of  kings  and  presi- 
dents and  parents  to  bow  down  before  them,  and  pay  them 
the  worship  of  dulia,  they  will  deserve  to  be  confounded ; 
according  to  the  Scripture,  "  confounded  be  all  they  that 
serve  graven  images !" 

Of  the  quality  of  the  worship  of  Images.   (No.  27.) 

"  With  what  worship  are  the  images  of  Christ  and  the 
Saints  to  be  worshipped  1 

"  It  is  to  be  premised  with  St.  Thom.  in  corp.  that  images 
may  be  regarded  in  a  twofold  manner. 

"  I.  In  so  far  as  they  are  anything  or  certain  matter,  say 
gold  or  sculptured  or  painted  wood ;  and  in  this  respect  they 
cannot  be  honoured. 

"  IT.  In  so  much  as  they  are  images  or  representations  of 
Christ  or  the  Saints :  and  in  this  respect  they  may  be  hon- 
oured with  relative  or  respective  worship  ;  so  doubtless  that 
they  may  not  be  honoured  for  the  sake  of  a  dignity  intrinsic 
in  themselves,  but  on  account  of  the  dignity  of  the  prototype 
or  pattern :  and  consequently  the  honour  shown  to  an  image 
redounds  to  the  prototype  as  to  the  formal  reason  of  the 


348      WORSHIP  AND  INVOCATION  OF  SAINTS. 

worship ;  although  the  object  which  the  representing  image 
itself  is,  is  not  the  reason  why  it  is  worshipped. 

"  III.  Therefore,  St.  Thomas  replies  to  the  question,  that 
images  may  be  honoured  with  the  same  worship,  with  which 
their  prototype  is  honoured,  but  only  with  a  relative  or  re- 
spective worship :  therefore,  the  images  of  the  Saints  are 
worshipped  with  the  respective  veneration  of  dulia ;  of  the 
Divine  Virgin  with  the  relative  worship  of  hyperdulia  ;  of 
Christ  and  of  God  with  the  respective  worship  of  latria : 
almost  just  as  if  by  the  same  virtue  we  love  God  and  our 
neighbour  on  account  of  the  goodness  of  God  in  himself. 

"  Many,  however,  maintain  that  this  respective  worship 
paid  to  images  ought  to  be  less  than  the  worship  shown  to 
the  prototype  itself:  and  hence  they  infer  that  the  worship 
of  latria  is  due  to  no  image.  They  rely  upon  the  Seventh 
Synod,  which  says  that  latria  is  not  to  be  shown  to  images, 
because  it  belongs  only  to  the  divine  nature. 

"  But  others  explain  the  Seventh  Synod  concerning  abso- 
lute latria,  which  is  not  due  to  the  images  of  Christ,  although 
the  respective  worship  of  latria  is  due  to  them ;  and,  there- 
fore, they  may  be  adored  with  less  honour  than  the  proto- 
type ;  which  are  not  repugnant  to  one  another. 

"  However  this  may  be,  it  is  sufficient  for  us  against  sec- 
tarians, that  all  Catholics  teach  and  prove  that  the  images 
of  the  Saints  are  to  be  worshipped. 

*'  ObJ.  It  seems  superstitious  to  worship  and  distinguish 
certain  images  as  though  miraculous. 

"  Ans.  I  deny  the  antecedent,  with  St.  Aug.  Epist.  cxxxvii. : 
for  this  distinction  is  to  be  sought  from  the  crratuitous  will  of 
God  whom  it  pleases  to  confer  special  benefits  upon  persons 
who  worship  one  image  rather  than  another ;  just  as  God 
restored  those  to  health,  who  looked  at  the  brazen  Serpent 
erected  by  Moses,  (Num.  xxi.  9.)  not  so  to  those  who  look- 
ed at  any  other :  Christ  restored  sight  to  the  man  who  had 
been  born  blind,  when  he  washed  himself  in  the  pool  of 
Siloam,  John  ix.  7.,  and  Naaman  the  Syrian  was  cleansed 
from  leprosy  in  the  Jordan,  4  Kgs.  v.  10.,  rather  than  else- 
where. 

"  In  the  same  way,  a  solution  is  given  when  the  objection 
is  made  against  the  invocation  of  Saints,  that  it  is  supersti- 


WORSHIP  AND  INVOCATION  OF  SAINTS.      349 

tious  to  invoke  one  Saint  for  such  a  disease,  another  for 
another. 

"  However,  the  Council  of  Trent,  sess.  xxv.  admonishes 
concerning  the  invocation  of  the  Saints,  that  the  faithful  be 
instructed  that  they  do  not  believe  that  there  is  any  inherent 
divinity  or  virtue  in  images,  on  account  of  which  they  are 
to  be  worshipped,  or  anything  to  be  asked  of  them,  or  con- 
fidence to  be  placed  in  them,  as  was  formerly  done  by  the 
Gentiles.  Besides,  it  admonishes  that  all  superstition  and 
filthy  lucre  be  guarded  against :  now  if  certain  abuses  are, 
perhaps,  committed  by  some  idiots,  the  church  neither  teaches 
nor  approves  them  ;  although  the  simplicity  and  good  inten- 
tion even  of  these  idiots  often  extenuate  if  they  do  not  ex- 
cuse." 

Op  the  Worship  of  Relics.   (No.  28.) 

"  What  is  understood  by  the  relics  of  the  Saints  ? 

"  The  bodies  of  the  Saints,  bones,  or  other  parts  of  the 
body,  or  other  things  made  holy  by  touching  those  bodies, 
as  garments,  chains,  or  other  instruments  of  suffering. 

"  Prove  that  they  are  to  be  honoured  and  venerated* 

"  It  is  proved  from  the  passage  from  the  Council  of  Trent, 
already  often  cited. 

"  It  is  confirmed  by  various  examples  of  Sacred  Scrip- 
ture: thus.  Gen.  1.  and  Exod.  xiii.,  the  bones  of  Jacob  and 
Joseph  were  preserved  with  great  honour  and  carried  over 
from  Egypt,  4  Kgs.  xiii.,  a  dead  body  touching  the  bones  of 
Elisha  revived:  see,  also,  ch.  xxiii.  18.  Matt.  ix.  20;  a 
woman  afflicted  with  an  issue  of  blood  touches  with  the 
greatest  veneration  the  hem  of  Christ's  garment  and  is  heal- 
ed. Acts  v,  15.,  they  expose  believing  sick  persons  in  the 
streets  in  order  that  at  least  the  shadow  of  Peter  might  cover 
them,  and  they  might  be  healed :  and  ch.  xix.  12.,  the  hand- 
kerchiefs and  girdles  of  St.  Paul  were  laid  upon  the  sick, 
and  their  maladies  lefl  them. 

"To  these  are  added  the  miracles  done  at  the  presence 
or  at  the  contact  of  the  Sacred  Cross  and  the  relics  of  the 
Saints.  See  St.  Aug.  S.  xxii.  de  Civ.  Dei.,  c.  8.  it.  Serm. 
cccxxiii  al.  31.  de  diver  sis. 

**  Finally,  it  is  proved  by  reason,  founded  on  the  words 
of  St.  Aug.   '  Whoever  has  affection  for  a  person,  venerates 


350      WORSHIP  AND  INVOCATION  OF  SAINTS. 

all  those  things  which  are  left  of  him  after  death ;'  there- 
fore, as  we  venerate  the  Saints  as  members  of  Christ  and 
our  intercessors,  we  consequently  ought,  also,  to  venerate 
their  relics  with  proper  honour  in  memory  of  them. 

"  With  what  worship  are  relics  honoured  ? 

"  In  a  similar  way  and  worship  in  which  the  images  of 
Christ  and  of  the  Saints,  according  to  what  has  been  said. 
No.  27 ;  and,  therefore,  with  the  same  worship  with  which 
the  person  is  honoured,  whose  relics  they  are,  but  relative 
and  respective :  for  just  as  images  are  honoured,  because 
they  represent  the  prototype  or  person ;  so,  also,  relics  in  so 
much  as  they  are  or  have  been  connected  with  him. 

"  Obj.  I.  Christ,  Matt,  xxiii.  29,  says.  Woe  to  you  Scribes 
and  Pharisees,  hypocrites  who  build  the  sepulchres  of  the 
prophets,  and  adorn  the  monuments  of  the  Just ;  therefore, 
he  forbids  the  worship  of  relics. 

"An5.  I  deny  the  inference:  because  Christ  does  not 
blame  the  deed  itself,  but  the  hypocrisy  in  the  deed :  for  if 
any  one  could  have  seen  their  hatred  of  heart  against  Christ, 
whose  heralds  the  prophets  had  been,  he  would  have  judged 
that  the  Jews  did  this  not  with  a  religious  intention  in  honour 
of  the  Prophets,  but  rather  for  the  triumph  of  their  own 
murderous  parents. 

"  Obj.  II.  A  dutiful  son  does  not  honour  the  instruments 
of  disgrace  by  which  his  father  was  put  to  death ;  therefore, 
the  Christian  ought  not  to  venerate  the  cross,  or  the  other 
instruments  of  the  death  of  Christ  or  the  Martyrs. 

"  Ans.  I  deny  the  inference :  there  is  a  disparity,  because 
the  disgraceful  instruments  of  the  father,  v.  g.,  the  scourge, 
or  the  block,  would  be  considered  by  the  son  only  as  the  dis- 
grace or  misfortune  of  the  father ;  for  if  they  had  been  the 
cause  of  exaltation  to  the  father,  and  of  liberation  from 
bitter  tyranny  to  the  son,  he  would  have  held  them  in 
esteem.  We  therefore  venerate  the  cross,  &c.,  not  in  so 
far  as  they  were  the  instruments  of  the  wicked  action  of 
torture,  but  inasmuch  as  they  were  instruments  of  the  vic- 
torious passion  and  exaltation,  which  also  were  made  holy 
by  contact  with  the  body  of  Christ  or  the  Saints." 


WORSHIP  AND  INVOCATION  OF  SAINTS.      351 

Corollaries  concerning  the  worship  of  relics.   (No.  29.) 

"  Would  it  therefore  be  proper  to  honour  the  lips  of  Judas, 
the  hands  of  the  crucifiers,  &c.,  on  account  of  their  touch- 
ing the  body  of  Christ  1 

"  Ans.  By  no  means  :  because  they  were  animate  instru- 
ments of  iniquity,  not  made  holy  through  contact  with  the 
body  of  Christ,  but  rather  dishonoured  by  the  wickedness  of 
those,  whose  members  they  were. 

"  Is  the  Divine  Virgin  to  be  honoured  with  the  respective 
worship  of  latria  on  account  of  contact  with  Christ,  just  as 
the  cross  of  Christ  is  adored  1 

"  Ans.  St.  Thom.  art.  5.  no ;  there  is  a  disparity,  because 
the  cross  is  an  inanimate  thing,  the  worship  of  which  is  in 
itself  only  respective;  but  as  the  B.  Virgin  is  a  person 
capable  of  absolute  worship  with  respect  to  herself,  thus  the 
honour  paid  to  her  is  considered  absolute,  and  not  respec- 
tive :  but  the  Divine  Virgin  cannot  be  adored  with  the  abso- 
lute worship  of  latria ;  therefore,  neither  with  the  respective. 

"  Observe,  that  the  true  cross  of  Christ  has  both  the 
claim  of  an  image,  inasmuch  as  it  represents  the  figure  of 
the  crucified  Lord ;  and  the  claim  of  a  relic  on  account  of 
contact  with  the  sacred  body  and  blood  :  but  other  crosses 
made  after  the  likeness  of  the  real  cross  have  only  the  claim 
of  an  image. 

"  Obj.  Therefore,  not  only  the  real  nails  and  the  real 
spears,  but  also,  all  nails  and  all  spears  have  the  claim  of  an 
image  of  Christ  crucified,  and  thus  may  be  honoured. 

"  Ans.  I  deny  the  inference :  for  any  kind  of  similitude 
is  not  sufficient  for  an  image,  (and  thus  an  egg  is  not  said  to 
be  the  image  of  another  egg ;)  but  it  is  requisite  that  one  be 
expressed  by  the  other  for  its  similitude :  just  as  crosses  are 
now  made  only  to  express  the  first  on  which  Christ  was 
crucified  ;  as  they  now  have  no  other  use  amongst  us  since 
the  edict  of  Constantino  the  Great,  prohibiting  criminals  to  be 
crucified :  but  not  all  nails  or  spears  are  made  for  the  repre- 
sentation of  those  which  were  the  instruments  of  Christ's 
passion,  but  they  are  made  for  other  purposes  :  yet  if  they 
should  be  made  as  a  representation  of  the  former,  they 
would  not  be  unworthy  of  proper  veneration ;  as  when  they 
are  painted  in  a  picture  together  with  a  cross. 


*,i  **  ^ "  >>    >^ 


352     WORSHIP  AND  INVOCATION  OF  SAINTS. 

"  From  these  things,  it  is  plain,  how  justly  the  Emperor 
Theodosius  has  forbidden  that  crosses  should  be  painted  or 
sculptured  on  the  ground,  v.  g.,  on  the  stones  of  monuments, 
on  account  of  the  danger  of  trampling  them  with  the  feet. 

"  In  what  sense  does  the  church  sing :  O  cross !  Hail 
only  hope  1 

*'  I  answer  with  Sylvius,  because  by  a  personification  the 
cross  is  introduced  for  him  who  hangs  on  the  cross :  and 
thus  the  sense  is :  O  Christ  crucified !  Hail  our  only 
hope. 

"Observe  finally,  that,  although  true  relics  may  be  pri- 
vately worshipped,  yet  they  may  not  be  exposed  for  public 
veneration  in  the  temple,  unless  they  have  been  approved  by 
the  Ordinary  or  Bishop.     Thus  the  Council  of  Trent,  sess. 

XXV." 

For  a  detailed  refutation  of  the  Romish  reasons  in  favour 
of  the  worship  of  Saints,  Images,  and  Relics,  my  reader 
must  permit  me  to  refer  him  to  my  Lectures  on  Romanism. 
My  limits  will  not  permit  me  to  repeat  the  argument  in  this 
connection,  and  he  will  there  find  as  satisfactory  an  answer 
as  I  am  able  to  give.  The  words  of  Paul  to  Elymas  may 
aptly  be  addressed  to  Anti-christ,  who  with  all  deceivable- 
ness  of  unrighteousness  endeavours  to  destroy  the  souls  of 
men.  "  O  full  of  all  subtilty  and  all  mischief,  thou  child  of 
the  devil,  thou  enemy  of  all  righteousness,  wilt  thou  not 
cease  to  pervert  the  right  ways  of  the  Lord  ?" 

Of  the  Virginity  of  the  Blessed  Virgin  Mary. 

"  Prove  that  Mary  always  remained  a  Virgin. 

"  It  is  proved,  because  she  was  a  Virgin  before  the  birth 
and  in  the  birth  (of  Christ),  from  the  prophecy  of  Isaiah, 
ch.  vii.  V.  14.  Behold  a  Virgin  shall  conceive  and  hear 
a  son :  where  it  is  not  only  signified  that  she  who  was  before 
a  Virgin  should  conceive  and  bear ;  for  what  sign  or  prodigy 
would  it  be,  that  she  who  was  a  Virgin  should  conceive  and 
bear  having  lost  her  virginity  ?  where  the  prophet  still  fore- 
tells it  as  a  great  and  extraordinary  sign  that  she  shall  con- 
ceive and  bear. 

"  The  same  is  proved  by  the  Apostles'  creed  :  Born 
of  the  Virgin  Mary. 

"  That  she  remained  a  Virgin  also  after  the  birth  is  proved 


WORSHIP  AND  INVOCATION  OF  SAINTS.     353 

by  divine  tradition  against  the  heretics,  Jovinian,  and  Hel- 
vidius ;  and  this  has  been  settled  in  various  councils ;  sig- 
nally in  general  ones,  &c. 

"  Ohj.  I.  It  is  said.  Matt.  i.  25.  of  Joseph ;  he  knew  her 
not  until  she  brought  forth  her  Jirst  horn  son ;  therefore, 
he  knew  her  after  the  birth,  and  the  Divine  Virgin  brought 
fortli  a  second  born. 

"  Ans.  I  deny  the  inference :  because  the  particle  until 
implies  that  this  was  not  done  before  the  birth,  in  order  that 
it  may  be  signified  that  the  virginity  was  unimpaired  until 
the  birth,  the  contrary  of  which  seemed  to  proceed  from  the 
birth  itself:  but  concerning  the  following  time  nothing  is 
affirmed  :  indeed,  it  is  clearly  supposed,  that  it  had  been 
much  less  lost  after  the  birth :  thus,  when  it  is  said.  Gen. 
viii.  7  :  the  raven  did  not  return  until  the  waters  were  dri- 
ed up ;  it  is  not  signified  that  it  afterwards  returned,  but 
rather  that  it  never  returned.  To  the  second  part  of  the 
inference,  it  is  replied  that  in  Scripture,  every  one  is  called 
the  first  born,  before  whom  no  one  has  been  born,  although 
he  may  be  the  only  son. 

"  ObJ.  II.  Matt.  xii.  Christ  is  said  to  have  had  brethren, 
therefore,  &c. 

"  I  answer,  they  were  not  Christ's  own  brothers,  neither 
by  the  Virgin  Mary,  nor  by  St.  Joseph :  but  in  Scripture 
phrase  relations  or  cousins  are  called  so,  even  beyond  the 
first  degree^ 

"  The  Holy  Fathers  commonly  suppose  that  the  Blessed 
Virgin  Mary  had  a  vow  of  preserving  her  virginity  ;  and 
hence,  St.  Aug.  lib.  de  virginit.  ch.  iv.  says,  '  Mary  replied 
to  the  angel  when  he  announced,  Hoto  shall  this  be,  since  I 
know  not  a  man !  Which  she  certainly  would  not  have 
said,  unless  she  had  devoted  herself  as  a  Virgin  to  God.' 
See  more  at  length,  St.  Thom.  art.  4." 

The  perpetual  virginity  of  Mary  is  a  point  which  must  be 
maintained  at  all  hazards,  for  great  is  Diana  of  the  Ephe- 
sians  !  We  venerate  the  memory  of  the  humble  and  holy 
Mary,  and  sure  we  are  that  if  the  spirits  of  the  just  in  glory 
could  take  cognizance  of  all  that  transpires  on  earth,  her 
heart  would  be  pained  by  the  idolatrous  worship  that  is  paid 
30  - 


354     WORSHIP  AND  INVOCATION  OF  SAINTS. 

to  her.  The  Church  of  Rome  makes  a  goddess  of  the 
Virgin  Mary;  she  is  the  Diana  of  the  Ronnans !  The 
Priests  must  sustain  her  claim  to  perpetual  virginity,  or  their 
craft  is  in  danger  to  be  set  at  nought,  the  magnificence  of 
Holy  Mother  would  be  destroyed  at  once,  if  this  key-stone 
of  the  arch  of  idolatry  were  knocked  out.  But  after  all  that 
has  been  said,  the  utmost  that  can  be  alleged  in  favour  of  the 
question  is  that  it  is  a  doubtful  case ;  probability  is  greatly 
against  it.  Certainly,  if  the  Lord  had  intended  that  the  vir- 
ginity of  Mary  should  be  an  article  of  faith,  to  be  always 
held  and  cherished  by  believers  to  the  end  of  time,  he  would 
have  clearly  revealed  it  in  the  Scriptures,  "  which  are  able 
to  make  wise  unto  salvation."  We  need  not  say  that  there 
is  no  such  declaration.  The  Evangelists  seldom  mention 
the  name  of  Mary  after  the  history  of  the  Saviour's  birth 
and  childhood,  and  the  Apostles  never  speak  of  her  at  all. 
The  virginity  of  Mary  before  the  birth  of  Christ,  is  plainly 
a  doctrine  of  revelation,  which  can  be  disputed  only  by  the 
most  reckless  infidels ;  but  the  passage  cited  in  the  preced- 
ing section  appears  to  my  mind  conclusive  evidence  against 
the  doctrine  of  the  Church  of  Rome,  especially  as  it  is  dis- 
tinctly afiirmed  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  that  marriage  is  honour- 
able in  all.  As  for  tradition  and  St.  Augustine,  they  may 
both  be  very  good  in  their  way,  but  as  proof  they  are  very 
indifl^erent. 

The  chapter  which  treats  of  the  nativity  of  Christ,  closes 
with  the  following  paragraph,  which  I  prefer  offering  in  the 
original  Latin. 

"  Peperit  autem  B.  Virgo  absque  dolore  vel  infirmitate,  ut 
dicitur  Can.  79.  Concilii  Trullani ;  egressus  est  enim  Chris- 
tus  ex  utero  clauso  matris :  quia  decebat,  ut,  quae  sine  libi- 
dine  conceperat,  sine  dolore  pareret ;  neque  tantum  sine 
dolore,  sed  cum  ingenti  jucunditate  et  loetitia  B.  Virgo 
peperit,  juxta  illud  Isaia)  cap.  xxxv.  2  :  Germinans  germi- 
nabif,  et  exultahit  Icetabunda  et  laudans." 


WORSHIP  AND  INVOCATION  OF  SAINTS.     355 

In  the  following  section,  the  question  is  asked : 

"  Where  and  by  whom  was  Christ  circumcised  ? 

"  Very  likely  in  the  same  stable  in  which  he  was  born 
and  very  probably  by  St.  Joseph :  because  no  place  was 
determined  for  this,  nor  was  that  office  sacred." 

In  No.  30,  we  are  told  that  "  it  is  disputed  whether  Joseph 
was  a  blacksmith  or  a  carpenter :  yet  from  the  opinion  of 
the  ancient  Christians  and  common  tradition,  the  latter  ap- 
pears the  more  probable." 

The  question  is  also  asked :  "  Had  Christ  several  gar- 
ments? Ans.  Yes,"  &c.  And  it  is  also  stated  that  "  he  did 
not  walk  barefoot,  but  with  sandals,  as  is  gathered  from 
Mark  vi.  9:  but  shod  with  sandals;  but  he  did  not  use 
shoes,  because  he  seems  to  have  forbidden  that.  Matt.  x.  9, 
10,"  &c. 

To  No.  41,  the  following  N.  B.  is  appended : 

"  Observe  against  the  heretics  that  Christ  rose  from  the 
sepulchre  when  closed :  for  the  glorious  body  penetrated  the 
stone,  just  as  he  afterwards  came  to  his  disciples  when  the 
doors  were  shut :  but  the  stone  was  rolled  away  from  the 
monument  by  the  angel  only  at  the  approach  of  the  women 
to  the  sepulchre :  therefore,  certain  painters  erroneously  de- 
pict Christ  as  rising  from  the  open  sepulchre." 

At  the  close  of  No.  42,  which  treats  of  the  apparitions 
of  Christ  after  his  resurrection,  we  find  the  following  re- 
marks : 

"  Did  not  Christ  appear  to  his  mother? 

"  I  answer  according  to  common  opinion,  yes ;  and  that 
on  the  first  day  of  the  resurrection :  for  so  says  the  Holy 
Father,  Bk.  iii.  de  virginibus :  '  therefore,  Mary  saw  the 
resurrection  of  the  Lord,  and  saw  it  first  and  believed ;'  and 
this  the  affection. of  Christ  for  his  dearly  beloved  mother 
appears  to  suggest. 

"  Oty*.  Mark  xvi.  9.,  it  is  said:  he  appeared  "first  to 
Mary  Magdalen  ;  therefore,  not  to  his  own  mother. 

"  Ans.  I  deny  the  inference  :  for  Mark  seems  to  be  speak- 
ing of  those  persons  whose  duty  it  would  be  to  be  witnesses 
and  proclaimers  of  the  resurrection  of  Christ,  or  who  should 
confirm  those  who  were  doubtful  concerning  it :  but  these 
things  do  not  relate  to  the  Divine  Virgin,"  &c. 


356  CONCERNING  THE  RfVCRAMENTS. 


CHAPTER  XXXIV. 

CONCEENING   THE    SaCRAMENTS. 

Preface. 

Decree  of  the  Council  of  Florence. 

"  There  are  seven  Sacraments  of  the  New  Law :  viz., 
Baptism,  Confirmation,  the  Eucharist,  Penance,  Extreme 
Unction,  Orders,  and  Marriage ;  which  differ  greatly  from 
the  Sacraments  of  the  ancient  law.  For  they  did  not  cause 
grace,  but  prefigured  that  it  was  to  be  given  alone  through 
the  passion  of  Christ :  but  these  our  Sacraments  both  con- 
tain grace  and  confer  it  upon  such  as  worthily  receive  them. 
Of  these,  the  first  five  have  been  ordained  for  the  spiritual 
perfection  of  every  man  in  himself:  the  last  two  for  the 
government  and  increase  of  the  whole  church.  For  by 
Baptism  we  are  spiritually  born  again  ,•  through  Confirma- 
tion we  are  increased  in  grace  and  strengthened  in  the  faith  : 
but  being  born  again  and  strengthened  we  are  nourished  by 
the  divine  aliment  of  the  Eucharist.  If  through  sin  we  con- 
tract a  malady  of  the  soul,  through  Penance  we  are  spiritu- 
ally healed :  spiritually,  also,  and  corporeally,  according  as 
it  is  expedient  for  the  soul  through  Extreme  Unction :  but 
by  Orders  the  church  is  governed  and  spiritually  increased : 
by  Marriage  it  is  increased  corporeally.  All  these  Sacra- 
ments are  performed  in  three  things,  viz.,  in  things  as  to 
matter,  in  words  as  to  form,  and  in  the  person  of  the  minis- 
ter conferring  the  Sacraments  with  the  intention  of  doing 
what  the  church  does :  if  anything  of  these  be  wanting,  the 
Sacrament  is  not  performed.  Among  these  Sacraments 
there  are  three.  Baptism,  Confirmation  and  Orders,  which 
impress  character  that  is  a  certain  indelible  spiritual  sign 
distinct  from  the  rest.  And  hence,  they  are  not  repeated  in 
the  same  person.  But  the  other  four  do  not  impress  charac* 
ter,  and  admit  of  repetition." 


CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS.  357 

Canons  of  the  Council  of  Trent  concerning 
Sacraments  in  general. 

"  I.  If  any  one  shall  say  that  the  Sacrannents  of  the  new 
law  have  not  all  been  instituted  by  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord ; 
or  that  they  are  more  or  less  than  seven  ;  viz.,  Baptism, 
Confirmation,  the  Eucharist,  Penance,  Extreme  Unction, 
Orders,  and  Marriage:  or,  also,  that  any  one  of  these  seven 
is  not  truly  a  Sacrament,  let  him  be  anathema !  (i.  e.  cursed 
in  this  world  and  damned  in  the  next.) 

"  II.  If  any  one  shall  say  that  the  Sacraments  themselves 
of  the  new  law,  do  not  differ  from  the  Sacraments  of  the 
old  law,  except,  because  the  ceremonies  are  different,  and 
the  external  rites  different :  let  him  be  anathema  ! 

"  III.  If  any  one  shall  say  that  these  seven  Sacraments 
are  so  equal  among  themselves,  that  for  no  reason  can  one 
be  more  worthy  than  another ;  let  him  be  anathema ! 

"  IV.  If  any  one  shall  say  that  the  Sacraments  of  the 
new  law  are  not  necessary  for  salvation,  but  superfluous, 
and  that  without  them,  or  the  desire  of  them,  men  may 
through  faith  alone  obtain  from  God  the  grace  of  justifica- 
tion ;  although  all  are  not  necessary  for  every  person ;  let 
him  be  anathema ! 

"  V.  If  any  one  shall  say  that  these  Sacraments  have 
been  instituted  merely  for  the  sake  of  nourishing  faith ;  let 
him  be  accursed  1 

"VI.  If  any  one  shall  say  that  the  Sacraments  of  the 
new  law  do  not  contain  the  grace  which  they  signify :  or 
that  they  do  not  confer  the  grace  itself  on  those  who  put 
no  obstacle  in  the  way,  as  if  they  were  only  the  external 
signs  of  grace  or  righteousness  received  by  faith,  and  cer- 
tain marks  of  Christian  profession,  by  which  among  men 
believers  are  discerned  from  infidels ;  let  him  be  anathema ! 

*'VIf.  If  any  one  shall  say  that  grace  is  not  conferred 
by  Sacraments  of  this  kind,  always,  and  upon  all,  as  far  as 
respects  God,  even  if  they  rightly  receive  them  ;  let  him  be 
anathema  1 

"  Vlll.  If  any  one  shall  say  that  grace  is  not  conferred 
by  the  Sacraments  of  the  new  law  themselves  by  their  own 
power,  but  that  mere  belief  of  the  divine  promise  is  sufficient 
to  obtain  grace ;  let  him  be  anathema  I 
30  * 


358  CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS. 

"  IX.  If  any  one  shall  say  that  by  the  three  Sacraments, 
Baptism,  Confirmation,  and  Orders,  character  is  not  impres- 
sed on  the  soul,  that  is,  a  certain  spiritual  and  indelible  sign, 
on  which  account  they  may  not  be  repeated ;  let  him  be 
anathema ! 

"  X.  If  any  one  shall  say  that  all  Christians  have  power 
to  preach  the  word  and  administer  all  the  Sacraments ;  let 
him  be  anathema ! 

*'  XI.  If  any  one  shall  say  that  the  intention  at  least  of 
doing  what  the  church  does,  is  not  requisite  in  ministers, 
when  they  perform  and  confer  Sacraments;  let  him  be 
anathema ! 

"  XII.  If  any  one  shall  say  that  a  minister  living  in  mor- 
tal sin,  does  not  perform  or  confer  a  Sacrament,  although 
he  may  have  preserved  all  essential  things  which  pertain  to 
performing  or  conferring  a  Sacrament;  let  him  be  ana- 
thema ! 

"XIII.  If  any  one  shall  say  that  the  received  and  ap- 
proved rites  of  the  Catholic  Church,  commonly  used  in  the 
solemn  administration  of  the  Sacraments,  may  be  either 
omitted  by  ministers  at  their  option,  without  sin,  or  that  they 
may  be  changed  for  other  new  ones  by  any  pastor  of  the 
churches  ;  let  him  be  anathema  !" 

Concerning  the  Matter  and  Form  of  the  Sacraments. 
(No.  5.) 

"  A  Sacrament  which  is  a  certain  moral  entity  consists 
of  two  things  as  essential  and  intrinsic  parts  of  which  it  is 
composed  :  to  wit,  of  things,  as  matter,  and  of  words  as 
form ;  yet  the  Eucharist  is  excepted  according  to  what  has 
just  been  said. 

"  What  is  here  understood  by  matter  ? 

"  That  sensible  thing,  which  less  methodically  signifies 
grace :  whether  that  be  a  certain  thing  subsisting  by  itself, 
or  a  substance  as  water  in  baptism,  or  whether  it  be  a  cer- 
tain action  concerning  those  things,  as  ablution,  &c. 

"  What  is  here  meant  by  form  ? 

"  Ans.  The  words  are  meant  by  which  the  minister  more 
accurately  and  clearly  restricts  the  sensible  thing  in  the 
Sacrament  to  signify  the  grace  and  spiritual  effect ;  as  in 
bajitisin,  /  baj)tize  thee,  &c. 


CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS.  359 

"  For  what  reason  are  the  parts  of  Sacraments  called  by 
the  name  of  matter  and  form  ? 

''  Ans.  We  use  these  philosophical  terms  for  the  sake  of 
explanation,  &c. 

"  It  is  to  be  observed,  therefore,  that  in  Sacraments  pro- 
perly there  are  no  matter  and  form,  but  as  it  were  the  mat- 
ter and  form  as  St.  Thorn,  adds  :  yet  for  the  sake  of  brevity 
it  has  become  customary  to  say  simply  the  matter  and 
form." 

Of  various  modes  of  changing  the  form,   (No.  11.) 

Tp  TV*  tC^  :^  ^  ^ 

"  The  form  is  changed  if  in  the  same  idiom  synonymous 
words  are  taken  for  those  which  the  church  employs ;  and 
it  will  be  only  an  accidental  change,  if  by  common  consent 
they  signify  the  same  not  only  as  to  the  thing,  but  also  ex- 
plicitly and  distinctly,  or  if  they  signify  the  same  in  the 
same  manner.  Hence,  baptism  would  be  valid  if  in  place 
of  /  baptize,  should  be  said,  I  tcash,  or  I  sprinkle  ;  but  not 
if  if  should  be  said,  I  cleanse  or  purge:  because  the  cleans- 
ing of  sins  by  way  of  washing  ought  to  be  signified  in  bap- 
tism. Nor  would  it  even  be  valid,  if  any  one  should  say : 
/  baptize  thee  in  the  name  of  the  Most  Holy  Trinity :  be- 
cause the  word  Trinity  does  not  signify  the  same  thing  in 
the  same  manner.  For  it  does  not  expressly  signify  the 
Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Ghost. 

"  The  form  is  changed  by  the  transposition  of  the  words, 
concerning  which  the  decision  would  be  the  same  as  above. 
Hence,  it  would  be  no  obstacle  to  the  validity  of  baptism,  if 
any  one  should  say :  In  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the 
Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  I  baptize  thee,  &c.  So  too, 
it  would  not  invalidate  the  Eucharist  according  to  Wiggers, 
if  the  Priest  should  say,  this  body  is  mine,  instead  of  this 
is  my  body,  &c.,  &c. 

"  The  form  may  be  changed  by  interruption  in  pronoun- 
cing the  form  of  the  words.  But  whether  a  substantial  or 
accidental  change  is  induced,  depends  upon  this,  whether  the 
delay  of  the  interruption  according  to  common  opinion 
separates,  or  whether  it  leaves  morally  one  speech  and  one 
sense ;  and  hence  it  would  be  only  an  accidental  change, 
if  some  one  between  the  words  of  the  form,  should  sneeze 


360  CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS. 

or  cough  once :  so,  also,  after  the  minister  has  said,  /  bap- 
tize thee,  if  he  should  say  to  some  who  are  chatting,  be  still, 
and  should  immediately  subjoin  in  the  name  of  the  Father, 
&c.,  the  Sacrament  would  subsist,  &c. 

"  The  form  is  changed  by  an  addition,  concerning  which 
the  reason  is  the  same  as  above ;  and  hence,  if  any  one 
with  the  Arians  should  baptize  in  the  name  of  the  Father, 
the  greater,  and  of  the  Son,  the  less,  &c.,  he  would  not 
perform  the  Sacrament. 

"  By  the  subtraction  of  a  word  or  syllable :  which  change 
will  be  substantial  or  accidental,  according  as  the  word  omit- 
ted concerns  the  essence  of  the  form  or  not. 

"  A  change  of  form  may  be  made  by  the  corruption  of  the 
words  :  concerning  which  St.  Thomas  speaks  thus  :  If  the 
corruption  is  such  that  it  entirely  destroys  the  sense  of  the 
phrase,  the  Sacrament  appears  not  to  be  performed  :  and 
this  principally  happens,  when  a  corruption  is  made  which 
concerns  the  principle  of  the  sentence :  suppose  if  instead  of 
that,  which  is  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  he  should  say  in 
the  name  of  the  Mother.  But  if  the  sense  of  the  discourse 
is  not  entirely  destroyed,  the  Sacrament  is  performed  notwith- 
standing :  and  this  principally  happens  when  a  corruption  is 
made  with  respect  to  the  end  :  suppose  if  any  one  should 
say  :  In  nomine  Patrias  et  Filias,  &c.  &c. 

"  Thus  also  all  are  of  opinion  that  a  stutterer  performs  the 
Sacrament,  although  he  may  separate  the  first  syllable :  v. 
g.  E  ego  te  te  bap  baptizo,  &c.  I,  I  bap  baptize  thee 
thee,  &c.,  also  ho  hoc  est  co  corpus  me  meum.  The  this  is 
me  my  ho  body  :  also  if  instead  of  corpus,  copus  should  be 
said,  in  place  of  calix,  calis,  &c.  And  hence  says  Billuarl, 
let  the  scrupulous  observe  these  things,  who  frequently  repeat 
the  words  irreverently  and  for  the  purpose  of  ridicule,  &c." 

Concerning  the  intention  of  the  Minister  relative  to  the 
change  of  Form.     (No.  12.) 

"  May  the  intention  of  the  minister  effect  that  the  change 
of  the  form  is  substantial  or  accidental  ? 

"  If  the  form  is  ambiguous  or  equivocal  on  account  of  the 
change,  so  that  according  to  the  common  mode  of  speaking 
it  receives  a  twofold  sense,  viz.  the  legitimate  sense  of  the 
form,  and  a  false  one ;  then  it  depends  on  the  intention  of  the 


CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS.  801 

minister,  whether  the  change  is  substantial,  or  accidental  : 
or  he  intends  the  true  and  legitimate  sense,  and  it  will  be 
only  accidental :  but  otherwise  substantial. 

"  Therefore  if  it  be  asked,  what  is  to  be  said  concerning 
this  form :  I  baptize  thee  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of 
the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  of  the  Blessed  Virgin 
Mary? 

"  I  answer  by  making  a  distinction  with  St.  Thomas,  art. 
8.  in  Corp.  '  The  change  will  be  substantial  if  it  be  so 
meant  that  the  person  is  to  be  baptized  in  the  name  of  the 
Virgin  Mary,  just  as  in  the  name  of  the  Trinity  :  for  such  a 
sense  would  destroy  the  verity  of  the  Sacrament :  but  if  it  be 
so  understood,  that  (and  in  the  name  of  the  Blessed  Virgin) 
is  added  not  as  if  the  name  of  the  Blessed  Virgin  can  effect 
anything  in  baptism,  but  that  her  intercession  may  be  of 
advantage  to  the  baptized  person  in  order  to  preserve  the 
baptismal  grace,  the  perfection  of  the  Sacrament  is  not  de- 
stroyed.' 

"  Tournely  rejects  this  distinction,  saying  that  such  a 
baptism  is  entirely  invalid. 

"  If  the  form  is  essentially  invalid,  the  minister  cannot 
supply  the  defect  by  his  own  intention  :  for  the  form  consists 
in  the  settled  sense  of  the  words,  but  words  have  their  signifi- 
cation from  common  application  and  custom,  and  not  from 
the  application  of  any  private  person  whatsoever. 

"  If  the  form  when  changed  retains  altogether  the  same 
sense  with  the  essential  form,  then  whatever  may  be  the  pri- 
vate intention  of  the  minister  with  respect  to  the  signification 
of  the  words,  the  change  will  be  only  accidental,  and  the 
Sacrament  is  performed,  so  far  as  the  form  is  concerned. 

"  It  is  said :  In  so  far  as  the  form  is  concerned  ;  because 
the  intention  is  required  in  the  minister,  of  doing  whatever 
the  Church  does  and  Christ  has  appointed  :  and  hence  he  who 
knowingly  introduces  an  accidental  change,  which  he  erro- 
neously supposes  to  be  essential,  regularly  does  not  perform 
the  Sacrament:  not  indeed  through  defect  of  the  matter  or 
form,  but  through  defect  of  the  intention  of  doing  what  the 
Church  does,"  &c. 

It  is  not  lawful  except  in  case  of  absolute  necessity,  to 
make  use  of  a  doubtful  form  or  matter  in  the  administration 
of  the  Sacraments.     (No.  13.) 


362  CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS. 

To  make  a  substantial  change  is  a  mortal  sin :  it  is  a  sin 
of  sacrilege  against  religion,  because  it  contains  grievous 
irreverence  towards  the  Sacrament,  and  towards  Christ  him- 
self, the  author  of  the  Sacraments.  It  is  also  a  sin  against 
love  to  our  neighbour,  and  against  justice. — An  accidental 
change  for  a  just  reason  is  no  sin  at  all ;  but  if  done  from 
contempt,  &c.  it  is  a  mortal  sin,  though  the  change  be  trifling. 

"Authors  observe,  that  although  ignorance  may  excuse 
certain  laymen  from  mortal  sin,  who  baptize  in  a  case  of 
necessity  with  a  form  essentially  or  accidentally  changed,  yet 
it  does  not  excuse  midwives,  who  ought  to  know  the  cere- 
mony of  baptism  by  heart,  before  they  are  admitted  to  the 
office  of  a  midwife,  as  the  Roman  ritual  and  the  lid  provincial 
Synod  of  Mechlin  prescribe.  In  like  manner  ignorance  will 
not  excuse  a  minister  ex  officio,  as  he  ought  to  know  what 
things  belong  to  his  own  office." 

If  the  form  is  so  changed  as  to  invalidate  the  Sacrament, 
the  Sacrament  must  be  repeated. 

If  there  is  a  reasonable  doubt  whether  it  has  been  legiti- 
mately pronounced,  then  it  is  lawful  to  repeat  it.  If  there  is 
no  reasonable  doubt,  it  is  improper.  (No.  14.) 

Do  the  Sacraments  of  the  New  Law  confer  grace  by  their 
own  power  (ex  opere  operato  ?)     (No.  18.) 

"  It  is  a  Catholic  doctrine  that  the  Sacraments  of  the  new 
law  contain  grace,  and  that  they  confer  it  by  their  own  power 
was  decreed  in  the  Council  of  Trent,  sess.  7.  can.  8.  Con- 
cerning Sacraments,  &c.  *  Whoever  shall  say  that  by  the 
Sacraments  themselves  of  the  new  law,  grace  is  not  con- 
ferred by  their  simple  administration,  let  him  be  accursed.' 

"  In  what  sense  does  the  Council  there  say,  canon  6.,  that 
the  Sacraments  of  the  New  Law  contain  grace? 

"  Not  as  if  grace  were  in  the  Sacraments,  as  the  accident 
in  the  subject,  a  thing  in  a  place,  or  liquor  in  a  vessel,  (as 
Calvin  basely  calumniates ;)  but  that  they  contain  grace  by 
way  of  cause  and  instrumentally  ;  or  as  Steyaert  says,  inas- 
much as  they  are  not  only  signs  of  grace,  like  those  of  the 
old  law,  but  also  instrumental  causes,  from  which  it  is  proper 
to  derive  it." 

This  theory  is  then  sustained  as  follows. 

"  John,  iii.  5.     It  is  said,  '  unless  a  man  be  born  again  of 


CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS.  363 

water  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  he  cannot  enter  into  the  king- 
dom of  God ;'  where  the  power  of  regeneration  is  attributed 
not  less  to  the  water  than  to  the  Holy  Ghost ;  to  the  water 
doubtless  as  the  instrument,  and  to  the  Holy  Ghost  as  the 
principal  cause. 

"  In  a  similar  way,  Eph.  v.  26,  the  apostle  says,  *  cleans- 
ing it  by  the  laver  of  water  in  the  word  of  life ;'  therefore 
the  baptism  of  water  truly  cleanses.  See  more  texts  in  au- 
thors. 

"  It  is  proved,  2.  If  Sacraments  could  not  confer  grace 
by  their  due  administration,  but  could  only  excite  faith  in  the 
divine  promises  (as  sectarians  profess,)  it  would  follow,  1. 
that  baptism  conferred  on  a  child  would  be  of  no  efficacy : 
2.  that  a  Sacrament  conferred  in  the  Latin  or  Greek  language 
would  effect  nothing  for  him,  who  does  not  understand  this 
idiom :  3.  that  a  Sacrament  sometimes  may  afford  grace  to 
the  spectators,  in  whom  it  might  excite  faith,  and  not  to  the 
receiver  himself,  in  whom  perhaps  faith  might  not  be  excited. 

*'  Calvin  objects,  1  Pet.  iii.  20  and  21,  it  is  said :  '  eight 
souls  were  saved  by  water ;  whereunto  baptism  being  of  the 
like  form  now  saveth  you  also :  not  the  putting  away  of  the 
filth  of  the  flesh,  but  the  examination  of  a  good  conscience 
towards  God :'  therefore  baptism  does  not  confer  grace,  but 
faith,  which  is  called  the  examination  of  a  good  conscience. 

"  Ans.  I  deny  the  inference :  for  the  sense  of  this  passage  is 
that  baptism  does  not  save  us  precisely  through  external 
washing,  by  which  the  filth  of  the  body  is  washed  off,  as  the 
baptism  or  purification  of  the  Jews  did :  but  by  internally 
cleansing  the  soul  from  sins  through  the  proper  deposition 
of  the  internal  conscience.  See  a  more  extended  explanation 
in  authors. 

"  Obj.  II.  If  Sacraments  confer  grace .  by  their  due  ad- 
ministration, a  proper  disposition  is  not  required  in  the  recipi- 
ent, nor  does  it  contribute  to  a  greater  or  less  conferring  of 
grace :  but  these  things  are  false ;  therefore,  &c. 

"  Ans.  I  deny  the  maj.,  for  it  is  certain  that  in  order  to 
a  profitable  reception  of  a  Sacrament,  a  proper  disposition  is 
required  in  adults ;  and  according  as  this  is  greater  or  less, 
so  much  the  greater  or  less  will  be  the  grace  to  be  conferred, 
as  the  Council  of  Trent  teaches,  sess.  6.  ch.  7. 

"But  this  disposition  is  only  an  indispensable  requisite : 


364  CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS. 

because  Sacraments  act  in  the  manner  of  natural  agents, 
which  effect  is  more  or  less  according  to  the  greater  or  less 
capacity  or  disposition  of  the  subject :  which  disposition  still 
has  no  efficiency  ;  as  is  plain  in  fire,  which  burns  dry  wood 
more  effectually  than  green,  although  the  dryness  is  merely 
the  remover  of  a  hindrance,  or  an  indispensable  requisite  and 
not  the  efficient  cause  of  combustion. 

Something  similar  is  found  in  those  whom  Christ  miracu- 
lously cured ;  of  whom  although  it  was  required  that  they 
should  believe,  yet  the  cure  was  not  effected  by  their  own 
faith,  but  by  the  virtue  of  Christ." 

Section  19.  discusses  the  question  whether  the  Sacraments 
cause  grace  physically  or  morally.  The  opinion  that  they 
cause  it  physically  is  the  more  probable. 

In  No.  22.,  which  treats  of  the  grace  peculiar  to  each 
Sacrament,  this  passage  occurs  : 

"  Mention  briefly  the  graces  which  are  peculiar  to  each 
Sacrament. 

"  Ans.  In  baptism,  is  habitual  grace,  in  so  far  as  it  is 
regenerative,  and  as  it  gives  to  a  person  his  first  spiritual 
existence,  destroying  every  fault  and  punishment. 

"  Actual  grace  is  the  assistance  which  is  afterwards  given 
in  its  own  time  in  order  to  preserve  the  purity  of  the  soul,  to 
live  in  a  Christian  manner,  and  to  receive  the  other  Sacra- 
ments worthily. 

*'  In  the  Sacrament  of  confirmation,  habitual  grace  or  its 
increase  is  corroborative  and  augmentative  of  regeneration. 

"  The  aids  of  actual  grace  are  in  order  to  keep  and  pro- 
fess the  faith  constantly,  and  to  overcome  contrary  tempta- 
tions. 

"  In  the  Eucharist  sanctifying  grace  tends  to  nourish  spi- 
ritual life,  and  to  unite  the  person  with  God  by  more  fervent 
performance  of  virtues,  &c. 

"  The  habitual  grace  of  the  Sacrament  of  penance  tends 
to  make  reparation  by  way  of  spiritual  healing  and  resusci- 
tation, &c. 

"  The  habitual  grace  of  Extreme  Unction  tends  more  fully 
to  heal  the  soul,  &c. 

"  The  habitual  grace  of  the  Sacrament  of  Orders  is  minis- 
trative,  or  in  order  to  the  due  performance  of  the  sacred 
functions  of  the  office,  &c. 


CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS.  365 

*'  Finally  the  habitual  grace  of  the  Sacrament  of  matri- 
mony tends  to  unite  the  minds,  and  to  restrain  the  lusts  of 
the  flesh,  &c.  &c." 

No.  26.  treats  of  the  Sacramental  character.  This  is  a 
spiritual  and  indelible  sign  impressed  on  the  soul.  It  is  called 
spiritual  not  only  because  the  soul  on  which  it  is  impressed 
is  spiritual,  but  also  because  it  is  the  cause  of  spirituality. 
*'  It  is  indelible  so  that  it  never  can  be  destroyed  either  in  this 
world  or  in  the  world  to  come,  but  it  will  remain  in  the  good 
for  their  glory,  and  in  the  bad  to  their  disgrace.  Hence  if  a 
priest  should  arise  from  the  dead,  he  would  not  have  to  be 
again  baptized,  confirmed  or  ordained.  It  would  be  another 
thing  if  one  of  a  married  couple  should  be  raised  from  the 
dead ;  for  then  they  would  have  to  be  united :  because  the 
bond  of  marriage  is  dissolved  by  death."  Baptism,  confirma- 
tion and  orders  confer  this  character.     (No.  27.) 

In  No.  34.  which  treats  of  the  faith  and  probity  of  the 
minister,  we  are  informed, 

"  Neither  the  probity  nor  the  faith  of  the  minister  is  neces- 
sary to  the  validity  or  effect  of  the  Sacrament :  so  that  all 
who  are  out  of  a  state  of  grace,  as  well  infidels  and  heretics 
as  believers,  whether  excommunicated,  suspended,  degraded 
persons,  &c.  may  confer  Sacraments  in  a  valid  and  profit- 
able manner,  if  only  the  other  requisites  to  the  validity  and 
effect  of  the  Sacraments  are  afforded." 

"  The  reason  is,  because  the  Sacraments  do  not  take  effect 
from  the  virtue  of  the  merits  or  faith  of  the  minister,  but  from 
a  divine  virtue  and  from  the  merits  of  Christ,  which  cannot 
be  hindered  by  the  wickedness  of  others,"  &c. 

"  To  administer  the  Sacraments  unworthily  or  in  a  state 
of  mortal  sin,  is  in  itself  a  mortal  sin  of  sacrilege:  but  any 
one  is  regarded  as  administering  thus  unworthily,  when  he 
is  conscious  to  himself  of  mortal  sin,  and  ventures  to  do  it 
without  sincere  repentance."     (No.  35.) 

In  a  case  of  this  kind  it  is  not  sufficient  that  the  Priest  is 
sorry  for  the  sin,  but  he  must  confess  sacramentally.  (No.  37.) 

It  is  not  lawful  to  ask  or  receive  Sacraments  from  a  minis- 
ter who  is  not  tolerated,  that  is  who  has  been  denounced  as 
one  whom  the  faithful  must  avoid,  except  in  cases  of  extreme 
necessity :  if  there  is  danger  of  some  one's  dying  without 
Baptism,  &ic. 
31 


366  CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS. 

Concerning  the  intention  necessary  on  the  part  of 
THE  Minister.     (No.  39.) 

"  Is  intention  in  the  njinister  requisite  to  the  valid  perform- 
ance of  a  Sacrament  ? 

"  Yes  ;  to  wit,  the  intention  of  doing  what  the  Church 
does :  so  that  a  Sacrament  conferred  through  mimicry  and 
for  ridicule,  or  by  a  crazy,  drunken  man,  or  in  any  other 
way  devoid  of  reason,  is  no  Sacrament  at  all. 

"  This  doctrine  the  Council  of  Florence  delivers,  and  like- 
wise the  Council  of  Trent,  sess.  7.  can.  11.  of  the  Sacra- 
ments :  *  If  any  one  shall  say  that  the  intention  is  not  re- 
quired in  ministers,  when  they  perform  and  confer  Sacra- 
ments, at  least  of  doing  what  the  Church  does,  let  him  be 
accursed.' 

"  The  primary  reason  of  this  is  sought  from  the  institution 
of  Christ,  which  is  clear,  especially  from  tradition. 

"  Besides  it  may  also  be  inferred  from  the  words  and  the 
manner  in  which  Christ  instituted  the  Sacraments:  v.  g. 
when  he  said  :  Whose  sins  ye  remit — and  tvhose  ye  retain^ 
&c.  ;  which  words  suppose  that  the  minister  confers  the  Sa- 
craments with  full  purpose  and  deliberation." 

"  It  is  to  be  observed  that  the  intention  is  an  act  of  the  will 
tending  towards  the  object :  and  hence  the  necessary  intention 
in  the  minister  consists  in  the  act  of  his  will,  by  which  he 
wills  the  external  performance  of  the  Sacraments,  with  the 
intention  of  doing  what  the  Church  does."  This  intention  is 
distinguished  as  actual,  virtual,  habitual,  and  interpretative. 

"  Actual  intention  is  the  present  and  actual  application  of 
the  mind  to  that  which  is  deliberately  done. 

"  Does  this  require  that  any  one  must  formally  say  in  his 
heart  or  by  his  lips — I  intend,  I  wish  to  do  this,  &c.,  v.  g.  I 
intend  to  baptize,  to  consecrate,  &c.  ? 

"  No :  but  it  is  enough  that  any  one  when  called  to  the 
administration  of  the  Sacraments,  and  girding  himself  for  this 
purpose,  begins  reverently  to  handle  the  matter,  &c. 

"  Indeed  those  scrupulous  reflections  upon  the  intention 
itself  are  to  be  disapproved,  inasmuch  as  they  hinder  devo- 
tion and  diminish  attention  relative  to  the  very  object  of  the 
act." 

"  Virtual  intention  is  that  by  which  some  person  by  the 


CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS.  367 

influence  of  the  actual  intention  previously  entertained  and 
still  morally  persevering,  with  self-possession  applies  himself 
to  the  duty  and  proceeds  in  its  performance,  although  on 
account  of  some  mental  distraction,  he  does  not  notice  the 
object  of  his  intention  or  what  he  is  doing." 

"  Habitual  intention  is  that  which  consists  only  in  a  certain 
habitual  disposition :  such  is  a  past  wish  that  has  been  inter- 
rupted, also  a  disposition  of  the  will,  which  neither  actually 
exists,  nor  ever  has  existed,  but  which  would  be  elicited  if 
this  or  that  should  occur  to  the  mind." 

"  Interpretative  intention  is  that  which  does  not  proceed 
from  the  will  as  the  eliciting  principle,  but  only  as  the  volun- 
tary effect  in  the  caiise  according  to  moral  interpretation  ; 
such  is  V.  g.  in  a  drunken  person,  who  knows  that  he  has 
been  accustomed  to  perform  sacramental  actions." 

Habitual  and  interpretative  intentions  are  not  sufficient ;  but 
actual  and  virtual  ones  are. 

"  Therefore  he,  who  advertently  has  gone  to  the  baptistry, 
confessional,  altar,  &c.  in  order  to  perform  some  ministerial 
duty,  baptizes,  absolves,  consecrates,  &c.  in  a  valid  manner, 
although  at  the  time  of  the  ministration  he  should  be  dis- 
tracted." 

"Say  the  same  of  a  priest,  who,  being  roused  at  midnight 
in  order  immediately  to  administer  the  Sacrament  of  bap- 
tism, penance.  Extreme  Unction,  &c.,  hastens  thus  half-asleep 
to  the  baptistry,  &c.,  and  whilst  still  thus  confused  adminis- 
ters the  Sacrament." 

In  No.  41,  the  following  cases  are  solved. 

"  Is  a  right  intention  in  the  minister  requisite  to  the  per- 
fection of  the  Sacrament  1 

"  If  only  a  right  intention  with  regard  to  the  Sacrament, 
or  at  least  an  implicit  intention  of  perforn\ing  a  Sacrament 
is  entertained,  the  Sacrament  will  be  valid,  although  the 
ulterior  intention  may  not  be  right :  and  hence  St.  Thomas 
teaches,  9,  64.  art.  10.  in  c. :  '  If  a  priest  intends  to  bap- 
tize some  woman  that  he  may  abuse  her,  or  if  he  intends  to 
prepare  the  body  of  Christ  that  he  may  use  it  for  poisoning ; 
and  because  the  former  does  not  depend  upon  the  latter, 
hence  it  is  that  such  perversity  of  intention  does  not  destroy 
the  verity  of  the  Sacrament,  but  the  minister  himself  sins 
grievously  by  such  an  intention.' 


368  CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS. 

"  Ought  the  intention  of  the  minister  to  l)e  fixed  as  to  a 
certain  person  or  matter? 

"  Yes,  as  is  plain  from  the  very  forms  of  the  Sacraments  : 
thus  by  I  baptize  thee,  I  absolve  thee,  a  certain  and  deter- 
mined person  is  designated ;  and  in  the  form  of  the  Euchar- 
ist, the  pronoun  hoc  designates  the  determined  matter  to  be 
consecrated. 

*'  Hence  in  the  Roman  missal,  where,  concerning  defects 
of  the  mass,  87,  we  read  thus  :  '  If  any  one  has  before  him 
eleven  hosts,  and  intends  to  consecrate  only  ten  :  not  deter- 
mining which  ten  he  intends  :  in  these  cases  he  does  not 
consecrate,  because  the  intention  is  required.'  For  a  reason 
cannot  be  given,  why  in  this  case  one  should  be  consecrated 
rather  than  another. 

"  What  if  any  should  think  that  there  were  only  ten  hosts, 
and  there  should  be  eleven,  or  that  he  holds  a  single  one 
whilst  he  holds  two  ? 

"  They  will  all  be  regularly  consecrated :  because  he  has 
the  intention  of  consecrating  that  which  was  placed  before 
him  ;  or  his  intention  is  directed  simply  to  the  matter  before 
him,"  &c. 

An  intention  which  is  based  on  certain  conditions  renders 
the  Sacrament  invalid,  unless  the  conditions  are  verified. 
(No.  42.) 

Of  the  number  of  the  Sacraments.     (No.  46.) 

The  Sacraments  of  the  New  Law  are  seven  ;  to  wit.  Bap- 
tism, Confirmation,  the  Eucharist,  Penance,  Extreme  Unc- 
tion, Orders  and  Matrimony. 

The  primary  reason  of  this  is  the  will  of  Christ  as  made 
known  by  divine  tradition.  "  This  number  of  seven  is  also 
insinuated  in  various  passages  of  Scripture.  Thus  Prov.  ix. 
1.  it  is  said.  Wisdom,  which  is  Christ,  has  built  a  house  for 
herself  that  is  the  Church,  and  she  hath  hewn  out  seven 
pillars,  doubtless  the  seven  Sacraments,  which  like  so  many 
pillars  sustain  the  church. 

*'  So  in  like  manner,  Exod.  xxv.  by  the  seven  lamps  which 
were  on  one  candlestick,  this  is  implied  :  for  there  are  seven 
Sacraments,  just  so  many  as  there  are  lamps,  which  illumine 
the  church,"  &c.  (!  I) 

This  peculiar  exegesis  is  further  sustained  by  an  argument 


CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS.  369 

based  upon  reason,  thus.  "  These  seven  things  seem  neces- 
sary for  a  man  in  order  to  live  and  preserve  his  life,  &c.  &;c. 
— viz.  that  he  should  be  ushered  into  the  light,  increased, 
nourished  ;  healed,  if  he  falls  into  sickness :  that  the  weak- 
ness of  his  strength  be  recruited  ;  farther  as  regards  the  state, 
that  magistrates  may  never  be  wanting  by  whose  authority 
and  rule,  government  may  be  exercised  :  and  lastly  that  by 
the  legitimate  propagation  of  offspring  it  may  preserve  itself 
and  the  human  race." 

"  From  all  which  things,  since  it  appears  that  they  suffi- 
ciently correspond  to  that  life  by  which  the  soul  lives  in  God, 
the  number  of  the  Sacraments  may  easily  be  inferred :  for 
thus  by  baptism  a  man  is  born  again  in  Christ,  &c." 


CHAPTER  XXXV. 
Treatise  concerning  the  Sacrament  of  Baptism. 

PREFACE. 

Decree  of  the  Council  of  Florence  for  the  instruction  of  the 

I  Armenians. 

"Holy  Baptism,  which  is  the  gate  of  spiritual  life,  occupies  the  first 
place  of  all  the  sacraments ;  for  by  it  we  are  made  members  of  Christ 
and  of  the  body  of  the  Church.  And  as  through  the  first  man,  death 
has  passed  upon  all ;  unless  we  are  born  again,  of  water  and  the  Holy 
Spirit,  we  cannot  (as  the  Truth  declares)  enter  into  the  kingdom  of 
heaven.  The  matter  of  this  sacrament  is  true  and  natural  water :  nor 
is  it  of  importance  whether  it  be  cold  or  hot.  But  the  form  is  :  I  bap- 
tize thee  in  the  name  of  the  Father^  and  of  JLhe  Son,  and  of  the  Holy 
Ghost.  Yet  we  do  not  deny  but  that  also  by  these  words,  Let  this  ser- 
vant of  Christ  be  baptized  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son, 
and  of  the  Holy  Ghost ;  or,  such  a  one  is  baptized  by  my  hands,  in  the 
name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  a  true  bap- 
tism may  be  performed  :  because  as  the  principal  source  from  which 
baptism  derives  its  virtue  is  the  Most  Holy  Trinity,  and  the  instru- 
mental one  is  the  minister,  if  the  act  is  expressed,  which  is  exercised 
by  the  minister  himself^  with  the  invocation  of  the  Moat  Holy  Trinity, 

ni  * 


370  CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS. 

the  sacrament  is  performed.  The  minister  of  this  sacrament  is  tlie 
priest,  on  whom  it  is  ex  officio  incumbent  to  baptize.  But  in  case  of 
necessity,  not  only  a  priest,  or  deacon,  but  also  a  layman,  or  woman, 
ndeed  even  a  pagan  and  a  heretic  may  baptize,  provided  only  he  ob- 
serves the  form  of  the  Church,  and  intends  to  do  what  the  Church  does. 
The  effect  of  this  sacrament  is  the  remission  of  all  original  and  actual 
guilt ;  also  of  all  punishment,  which  is  due  for  that  guilt.  On  this  ac- 
count  no  satisfaction  is  to  be  enjoined  upon  baptized  persons  for  past 
sins ;  but  if  they  die  before  they  commit  any  fault,  they  immediately 
arrive  at  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  and  tlie  vision  of  God." 

Canons  of  the  Council  of  Trent  concerning  Baptism. 

"  1.  Whoever  shall  say  that  the  baptism  of  John  had  the  same  virtue 
as  the  baptism  of  Christ ;  let  him  be  accursed ! 

"  2.  Whoever  shall  say  that  true  and  natural  water  is  not  absolutely 
necessary  for  baptism,  and  therefore  wrests  those  words  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  as  though  they  had  been  a  kind  of  metaphor :  '  Ex- 
cept a  man  be  born  of  water,  and  the  Holy  Spirit ;'  let  him  be  ac- 
cursed ! 

"  3.  Whoever  shall  say  that  in  the  Roman  Church,  which  is  the  mo- 
ther and  mistress  of  all  churches,  the  doctrine  concerning  the  sacra- 
ment of  baptism  is  not  true ;  let  him  be  accursed ! 

"  4.  Whoever  shall  say  that  the  baptism  which  is  also  given  by  he- 
retics, in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy 
Ghost,  with  the  intention  of  doing  what  the  Church  does,  is  not  true 
baptism  ;  let  him  be  accursed ! 

"  5.  Whoever  shall  say  that  baptism  is  optional,  that  is,  not  neces- 
sary  to  salvation ;  let  him  be  accursed  ! 

"  6.  Whoever  shall  say  that  a  baptized  person  cannot,  even  if  he 
would,  lose  grace,  how  much  soever  he  may  sin,  unless  he  is  unwil- 
ling to  believe ;  let  him  be  accursed ! 

"  7.  Whoever  shall  say  that  baptized  persons,  by  baptism  itself,  be- 
come debtors  to  preserve  faith  alone,  and  not  the  whole  law  of  Christ; 
let  him  be  accursed  ! 

"  8.  Whoever  shall  say  that  baptized  persons  are  free  from  all  pre- 
cepts of  Holy  Church,  which  are  either  written  or  traditional,  bo  that 
they  are  not  bound  to  observe  them,  unless  they  choose  to  submit  them- 
selves to  them  of  their  own  accord  ;  let  him  be  accursed  ! 

"  9.  Whoever  shall  say  that  men  are  so  to  be  recalled  to  the  memory 
of  the  baptism  which  they  have  received,  that  they  may  regard  all  the 
vows  which  arc  made  after  baptism  as  null  and  void,  by  virtue  of  the 
promise  already  made  in  baptism  itself,  as  if  by  it  they  detract  from 


CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS.  371 

the  faith  wliich  tliey  have  professed,  and  from  the  baptism  itself;  let 
him  be  accursed ! 

•  "  10.  Whoever  shall  say  that  all  the  sins  which  are  committed  after 
baptism,  by  the  mere  remembrance  and  faith  of  the  baptism  received, 
are  either  dismissed  or  become  venial ;  let  him  be  accursed  ! 

"  11.  Whoever  shall  say  that  a  baptism,  truly  and  with  due  ceremony 
conferred,  is  to  be  repeated  on  him  who  has  denied  the  faith  of  Christ 
among  infidels,  when  he  is  converted  to  repentance ;  let  him  be  ac- 
cursed ! 

"  12.  Whoever  shall  say  that  no  one  is  to  be  baptized,  except  at  that 
age  at  which  Christ  was  baptized,  or  in  the  article  of  death  ;  let  hira  be 
accursed ! 

"  13.  Whoever  shall  say  that  infants,  because  they  have  not  the  act 
of  faith,  are  not  to  be  reckoned  among  believers  after  having  received 
baptism,  and  on  tliis  account  are  to  be  re-baptized  when  they  arrive  at 
years  of  discretion ;  or  that  it  is  better  that  their  baptism  be  omitted, 
than  that  they  should  be  baptized  in  the  faith  only  of  the  Church,  when 
they  do  not  believe  by  their  own  act ;  let  him  be  accursed ! 

"  14.  Whoever  shall  say  that  baptized  children  of  this  kind,  when 
they  have  grown  up,  are  to  be  asked  whether  they  wish  to  have  that 
ratified  which  their  sponsors  promised  in  their  name  when  they  were 
baptized ;  and  that  when  they  reply  that  they  are  unwilling,  they  are 
to  be  left  to  their  own  choice ;  and  that  they  are  not  in  the  mean 
time  to  be  compelled  by  any  other  punishment  to  a  Christian  life,  ex- 
cept that  they  be  prohibited  the  enjoyment  of  the  Eucharist,  and  the 
otlior  sacraments,  until  they  repent ;  let  him  be  accursed  !" 

Concerning  the  Sacrament  of  Baptism. 

The  sacrament  of  baptism  is  defined  as  "  the  external 
washing  of  the  body,  performed  with  the  prescribed  form 
of  words;  and  by  the  Roman  Catechism  :  the  sacrament  of 
regeneration  through  water  in  the  word.  But  it  is  com- 
monly defined,  A  sacrament  instituted  by  Christ  the  Lord, 
in  which  throvgh  the  external  ablution  of  the  body  with  the 
invocation  of  the  Most  Holy  Trinity,  a  person  is  spiritually 
regenerated.'''* 

"  Did  Christ  himself  baptize  no  one? 

"  Although  it  is  said,  John  iv.  2,  *  Although  Jesus  did  not 
baptize,  but  his  disciples  ;'  it  is  still  on  the  whole  probable, 
that  he  at  least  baptized  some  one  of  the  Apostles,  lest  the 
Apostles,  when  unbaptized,  should  have  baptized  others  :  and 


372  CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS. 

therefore  Nicephorus  quotes  from  Eurodius  Antiochanus, 
that  Christ  himsetf  with  his  own  hands  baptized  Peter. 
Others  say,  that  Christ  did  this  in  the  case  of  his  mother  and 
John  the  Baptist."  (No.  2.) 

The  remote  matter  of  Baptism  is  all  natural  or  elementary 
water,  and  that  only. 

"  Mention  some  kinds  of  natural  water  which  are  sufficient 
for  the  matter  of  baptism. 

"  Such  are  the  water  of  the  sea,  rain-water,  water  from  a 
spring,  or  river,  mineral  water  ;  whether  it  is  muddy  or 
clear  ;  cold  or  hot ;  whether  it  has  been  blessed  or  not. 

"  The  same  is  maintained  with  S.  Thom.  concerning  lye 
and  the  waters  of  sulphur  baths.  So  also  of  waters,  dis- 
solved from  hail,  snow,  or  ice,  before  the  ablution.  Henno 
and  Billuart  say  the  same  of  the  moisture  of  a  pavement,  or 
of  walls,  in  damp  weather ;  also  of  water  strained  out  of 
clay. 

"  On  the  other  hand,  baptism  is  invalid  when  performed 
with  clay,  wine,  thick  beer,  milk,  oil,  spittle,  sweat,  tears, 
urine ;  also  with  ice,  snow  or  hail  not  yet  dissolved ;  also 
most  probably  with  rose  water,  or  any  other  distilled  from 
trees,  herbs,  or  flowers. 

"  Yet  they  maintain  plausibly  that  it  is  valid  with  beer, 
gruel,  tea,  and  similar  weak  and  light  decoctions :  but  it 
would  certainly  not  be  valid  if  the  solution  of  the  distilled 
substances  is  made  so  strong  that  the  liquor  has  more  of  the 
foreign  substance  than  of  the  water.  It  is  more  doubtful  in 
the  case  of  water  dissolved  out  of  salt."    (No.  3.) 

"  From  the  preceding  remarks,  infer 

"  1.  That  every  one  who  administers  baptism  is  bound  to 
use  the  proper  matter  under  mortal  sin,  properly  speaking. 

"  2.  If  the  proper  matter  is  not  at  hand,  and  necessity  is 
urgent,  he  may  and  should  apply  doubtful  matter,  always 
preferring  the  less  doubtful. 

"  3.  If  the  child  thus  baptized  in  doubtful  matter  after- 
wards survives,  it  must  be  re-baptized  on  this  condition  in 
proper  matter. 

"  4.  But  to  use  matter  which  is  positively  insufficient,  (as 
wine,  oil,  &c.)  whatever  necessity  may  urge,  is  useless  and 
unlawful." 


CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS.  373 

In  order  Ihat  baptism  may  be  performed  in  a  proper  as 
well  as  in  a  valid  manner,  observe 

*'  1.  Water  from  the  baptismal  font  should  be  applied,  and 
this  obligation  is  certainly  important  for  a  solemn  baptism. 

"  2.  Braunman  maintains  the  same  concerning  baptism, 
privately  administered :  and  hence  the  minister  called  for 
such  an  emergency,  must  take  with  him  a  little  flask  of  water 
from  the  sacred  font,  or  order  it  to  be  obtained. 

"  3.  Yet  urgent  necessity  is  excepted,  or  in  case  baptism 
must  be  administered  by  a  midwife,  &c. 

"  4.  The  water  of  the  sacred  font  should  be  kept  clean ; 
and  therefore  too  much  chrism  ought  not  to  be  mixed,  nor 
should  it  be  spoiled  in  any  other  way :  and  hence  a  child  in- 
fected with  a  contagious  disease  ought  not  to  be  baptized  over 
the  font,  but  away  from  the  font,  with  water  taken  from  the 
font. 

"  5.  If  the  water  in  the  font  is  frozen,  or  too  cold,  it  may 
be  warmed  with  the  hands,  or  mixed  (but  in  a  greater  quan- 
tity,) with  common  warm  water. 

*'  6.  If  the  water  of  the  sacred  font  has  been  so  much  di- 
minished that  a  failure  may  be  apprehended,  other  common 
water  may  be  mixed  with  it,  yet  in  a  smaller  quantity.  If  it 
has  been  corrupted,  or  in  some  other  way  become  defective, 
let  fresh  water  be  poured  into  the  font  when  properly 
cleansed,  and  let  it  be  blessed,  &c."  (No.  4.) 

The  proximate  matter  of  baptism  is  the  application  of  the 
remote  matter,  viz.,  natural  water,  or  the  corporeal  ablution 
itself.  This  ablution  may  be  performed  in  a  threefold  man- 
ner; 1,  by  immersion  ;  2,  by  sprinkling ;  and  3,  by  pouring 
out,  or  pouring  in,  or  pouring  on.  Any  one  of  these  three 
modes  is  sufficient  to  constitute  the  sacrament  valid.  A  three- 
fold immersion,  or  sprinkling,  &c.,  is  not  essential  to  the 
vaUdity  of  the  sacrament ;  but  the  latter  is  enjoined,  and 
any  one  baptizing  in  any  other  manner  would  commit  a 
grievous  offence  in  not  observing  the  rite  of  the  Church  in  an 
important  thing.     (No.  5.) 

In  order  necessarily  to  constitute  a  sacrament,  the  ablution 
should  be  "  generally  such  that  the  minister  may  be  truly 
said  to  wash  the  person  to  be  baptized ;  so  that  he  may  be 
morally  regarded  as  washed  or  cleansed  :  concerning  which 
the  following  things  are  requisite  : 


374  CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS. 

"  1.  That  the  ablution  be  performed  by  a  minister,  or  by 
the  intervention  of  his  agency  ;  for  otherwise  he  could  not 
'.ruly  say,  /  baptize  thee;  and  hence  if  upon  seeing  some  one 
falling,  or  thrown  by  another  person  into  a  river,  or  washed 
with  water  in  some  other  way,  he  pronounces  the  words  of 
the  form,  it  will  be  no  sacrament. 

"  The  same  seems  rather  probable  if  he  is  baptized  with 
snow  or  ice,  applied  indeed  by  the  minister,  but  dissolved 
only  after  the  application  through  the  heat  of  the  body  of  the 
person  to  be  baptized.  Yet  it  is  not  necessary  that  the  min 
ister  should  immediately  touch  the  water,  or  the  person  to  be 
baptized  ;  and  hence  in  some  places  water  is  poured  on  the 
head  of  the  candidate  for  baptism,  by  means  of  a  shell ;  in 
such  a  manner  also  the  minister  may  consult  his  own  safety 
against  a  contagious  disease,  v.  g.,  in  time  of  pestilence. 

"  2.  It  is  requisite  that  the  ablution  be  successive,  so  that 
it  be  performed  with  some  motion  of  the  successive  contact 
of  the  water  around  the  body  :  whether  this  successive  con- 
tact arises  from  the  application  of  water  to  the  body,  (as  is 
done  in  baptism  by  effusion,)  or  from  the  application  of  the 
body  to  the  water,  as  in  baptism  by  immersion. 

"  Hence  the  baptism  would  be  invalid  if  the  person  to  be 
baptized  should  be  held  motionless  in  water  that  is  not  agi- 
tated :  also  if  only  a  few  drops  of  water  that  has  not  been 
stirred  remain  on  his  forehead  without  any  local  motion. 

"  3.  It  must  be  the  ablution  of  the  body  itself  by  the  im- 
mediate or  physical  contact  of  the  water  with  the  body  :  yet 
it  is  not  necessary  that  it  wash  off  the  filth.  Hence  the  bap- 
tism is  not  valid,  if  the  water  touches  only  the  clothes :  as 
may  easily  happen  in  baptism  by  sprinkling. 

"  If  the  water  touches  only  the  hair,  nails,  the  pelles  se- 
cundinse  or  the  galea  nativitatis,  the  baptism  is  very  uncer- 
tain ;  hence  they  admonish  that  care  must  sedulously  be 
taken,  that  when  persons  who  have  much  hair  are  brought 
forward  for  baptism,  that  the  skin  be  rubbed  with  the  water, 
lest  the  ablution  be  performed  only  on  the  hair.  It  should 
likewise  be  enjoined  upon  midwives,  that  when  they  baptize 
in  a  case  of  necessity,  they  first  break  the  secondary  skin, 
in  order  that  the  water  may  immediately  touch  the  body. 

"  4.  The  ablution  should  be  performed  on  so  considerable 
a  part  of  the  body,  and  with  such  a  quantity  of  water,  that 


CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS.  375 

the  man  may  in  consequence  be  morally  denommated  washed 
or  cleansed.  Hence  it  is  rather  probable  that  one  or  two 
drops  of  water  are  not  sufficient  for  baptism :  yet  because 
some  teach  that  it  is  enough  if  it  only  flows,  in  case  of  neces- 
sity this  may  serve :  it  would  be  however  on  condition  that 
if  he  survives  he  must  be  rebaptized.  For  greater  security, 
that  quantity  of  water  should  always  be  applied  (if  it  is  at 
hand)  which  is  certainly  sufficient  for  baptism  :  and  hence  it 
is  better  to  exceed  a  little  in  the  quantity  than  to  be  deficient." 
(No.  6.) 

As  for  the  part  of  the  body  in  which  the  ablution  should 
take  place,  according  to  the  practice  of  the  church,  the  head 
is  to  be  washed  as  the  principal  abode  of  the  soul,  and  the 
part  in  which  all  the  senses  are  strongest ;  but  it  is  not  neces- 
sary that  the  whole  head  should  be  washed,  but  a  considera- 
ble part  of  it,  or  according  to  the  practice  of  the  church,  the 
top.  The  Roman  ritual  has  decided  in  certain  cases  as  fol- 
lows. 

"  If  an  infant  has  put  forth  its  head  from  the  womb  of  the  mo- 
ther, and  the  danger  of  death  is  imminent,  let  it  be  baptized  on 
the  head ;  neither  must  it  afterwards  be  baptized  a  second  time, 
if  it  comes  forth  alive.  But  if  it  has  put  forth  another  mem- 
ber which  gives  indication  of  vital  motion,  it  may  be  baptized 
on  it,  if  danger  threatens ;  and  then  if  it  survives  when  born, 
it  must  on  that  condition  be  rebaptized :  but  if  thus  baptized 
it  afterwards  comes  forth  from  the  womb  dead,  it  ought  to  be 
buried  in  consecrated  ground. 

"  What  if  the  infant  baptized  in  this  case  of  necessity,  v. 
g.,  in  the  hand,  afterwards  puts  forth  its  head  ] 

"  Ans.  Without  delay  it  must  on  this  condition  be  rebap- 
tized on  the  head,  if  the  danger  continues :  but  otherwise  its 
entire  egression  from  the  womb  must  be  waited  for.  The 
same  is  to  be  observed,  if  in  a  danger  of  this  kind  the  baptism 
may  be  rendered  considerably  more  certain :  v.  g.  an  infant 
before  baptized  only  on  the  toes,  ought  now  if  the  danger  is 
still  urgent,  to  be  conditionally  baptized  on  the  feet  them- 
selves. 

"  But  what  if  there  appears  no  sign  of  life  in  the  part  pro- 
truding from  the  womb  ? 

"  Ans.  It  may  be  baptized  on  that  part  on  the  condition, 
if  thou  art  alive  ;  for  it  has  been  found  in  the  experience  of 


376  CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS, 

midwives,  that,  although  no  sign  of  life  may  appear  in  the 
part  thus  protruding,  yet  it  may  afterwards  be  found  to  be 
alive.  If,  however,  says  our  manual,  no  sign  of  life  has 
afterwards  appeared,  it  may  not  be  buried  in  consecrated 
ground."     (No.  7.) 

"  Is  baptism  validly  conferred  by  a  fatal  ablution  ? 

**  Ans.  It  may  be  fatal  in  a  twofold  manner  :  one  by  reason 
of  the  matter,  as  when  an  infant  is  baptized  in  boiling  or 
in  poisoned  water:  and  such  ablution  is  sufficient  for  the 
validity  of  baptism ;  because  it  certainly  remains  a  true 
moral  ablution,  &c.  The  one  is  called  fatal  in  itself,  or  by 
reason  of  the  action,  as  when  any  one  throws  a  boy  into  a 
well  or  a  river  without  hope  of  emerging.  This  action  is 
certainly  unlawful,  &c.  But  it  is  controverted  whether  it  is 
sufficient  to  constitute  valid  baptism,  if  the  form  is  pronounced 
together  with  the  intention  of  baptizing."  The  case  is  then 
argued  pro  and  con  at  considerable  length.  Suarez,  Wig- 
gers,  Neesen,  Pauwels,  Van  Roy,  Boudart,  &c.,  maintain  the 
affirmative ;  and  Scotus  and  the  Scotists,  Daelman,  Peringue, 
&;c.,  the  negative.     (No.  8.) 

"  What  is  the  legitimate  form  of  baptism  ? 

"  Among  the  Latins  it  is  this  :  I  baptize  thee  in  the  name 
of  the  Father i  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 
That  this  is  the  legitimate  one  is  plain  from  the  Council  of 
Florence  in  the  decree  for  the  instruction  of  the  Armenians  ; 
from  the  Council  of  Trent,  sess.  7.  can.  4;  from  the  Roman 
ritual,  &c.,  and  from  the  most  certain  practice  of  the  whole 
Western  or  Latin  Church.  But  this  form  is  gathered  from 
Matt,  xxviii. :  baptizing  them  in  the  name,  &c. 

"  Among  the  Greeks  the  form  is  this  :  Let  this  servant, 
or  (as  others  now  say,)  this  servant  of  Christ  is  baptized 
in  the  name,  &c.  This  also  is  legitimate  and  sufficient  as  is 
plain  from  Eugenius,  iv.  in  the  same  decree  of  the  Council 
of  Florence :  for  each  expresses  the  action  of  baptizing  (the 
Latins'  in  the  act  signified,  the  Greeks'  in  the  act  exercised,) 
and  the  explicit  invocation  of  the  most  holy  Trinity.  It  is 
evident  also  from  the  practice  of  the  Church  in  not  baptizing 
Greeks,  although  some  Greek  schismatics  have  dared  to 
baptize  those  who  had  been  baptized  by  Latins.  The 
Greeks  use  this  form,  in  order  to  avoid  and  refute  among 
their  own  people,  the  error  of  the  ancients,  who  attributed 


CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS.  377 

the  virtue  of  baptism  to  the  persons  baptizing  as  the  principal 
cause,  and  said  with  the  Corinthian  schismatics :  I  am  of 
Paul,  I  am  of  Cephas,  &c. 

"  Which  of  these  two  forms  is  to  be  preferred? 

"  Ans.  Each  is  to  be  observed  respectively  in  its  own 
Church,  and  this  under  grievous  sin,  as  Pauwels  observes. 
Further,  both  are  to  be  approved  as  respectively  proper,  and 
absolutely  sufficient.  The  form  of  the  Latins,  however,  is 
more  perspicuous,  and  corresponds  better  with  the  words  of 
Christ :  Baptizing  them  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  (fee. 
(No.  9.)  As  for  the  essentials  of  the  form  of  Baptism  it  is 
necessary  that  in  it  the  person  to  be  baptized  is  expressed, 
either  by  the  particle  thee,  or  by  his  proper  name,  or  in  some 
other  way.  The  act  of  baptizing  must  also  be  expressed  ; 
and  although  the  baptism  would  be  valid  in  saying,  I  wash, 
1  sprinkle,  &c.,  yet  the  words  I  baptize  are  to  be  retained. 
If  the  particle  in  is  omitted,  according  to  Daelman  the  Sacra- 
ment becomes  null  and  void,  so  also  if  the  minister  should  say 
in  the  names,  instead  of  in  the  name  ;  but  if  the  minister 
should  say  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  in  the  name  of 
the  Son,  &c.,  Sylvius,  Van  Roy,  and  Billuart  think  that  it 
is  valid,  because  this  multiplication  does  not  imply  a  diver- 
sity of  virtue  and  essence :  however,  Boudart,  Pauwels, 
Neesen  and  Daelman  more  properly  say  the  contrary  :  be- 
cause although  a  diversity  may  not  then  be  implied,  identity 
is  certainly  not  signified.  Baptism  conferred  under  these 
forms  is  not  valid :  /  baptize  thee  in  the  name  of  the  most 
Holy  Trinity,  or  in  the  name  of  the  three  divine  Persons, 
or  in  the  name  of  the  one  and  triune  God,  or  in  the  name 
of  the  first,  and  of  the  second,  and  of  the  third  Person,  or  in 
the  name  of  the  Omnipotent,  of  the  Wise  and  of  the  Good.'''' 

"  Does  the  conjunction  and  belong  to  the  essential  form  ? 

"  Ans.  Some  say  it  does :  because,  if  it  be  taken  away, 
the  distinction  of  the  Persons  is  not  sufficiently  expressed. 
The  contrary,  however,  seems  more  probable  to  many ; 
because  it  is  sufficiently  understood.  The  case  would  be 
different,  however,  if  it  should  be  omitted  in  the  sense  of 
Sabellius,  in  signifying  that  these  three  names  designate  the 
same  Person,  endowed  with  three  faculties,"  6z;c.,  (No.  10.) 

Baptism  in  the  name  of  Christ  only  is  never  valid,  (No. 

11.) 

32 


378  CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS. 

"  Although  any  one  may  baptize  in  a  case  of  necessity, 
yet  if  several  persons  are  present,  the  order  of  dignity  is  to 
be  preserved,  of  which  the  Roman  ritual  treats  in  these 
words:  'If  a  Priest  is  present,  let  him  be  preferred  to  a 
Deacon,  the  Deacon  to  a  sub-Deacon,  a  Clergyman  to  a 
layman,  and  a  man  to  a  woman,  unless  for  the  sake  of 
modesty  it  may  be  more  proper  for  a  woman  rather  than  a 
man  (understand,  also,  a  Priest  and  Pastor)  to  baptize  an 
infant  not  entirely  brought  forth,  or  unless  the  woman  should 
know  the  form  and  mode  of  baptizing  better.'  The  latter 
exception  often  takes  place  in  midwives,  who  are  usually 
better  instructed  concerning  the  mode  of  baptizing  than 
others  of  the  laity.  But  in  the  former  case  of  exception, 
the  Pastor,  if  he  is  at  hand,  should  remain  present  in  some 
place  where  he  may  observe  that  the  form  is  not  corrupted." 

It  is  a  mortal  sin  to  invert  this  order  of  procedure  in  the 
case  of  a  Priest,  even  if  he  consents.  In  case  of  a  Deacon, 
it  is  not  certain ;  but  in  respect  to  others  inferior  to  a  Dea- 
con, it  is  not  a  serious  offence. 

"  Midwives  are  moreover  to  be  instructed  that  in  a  dan- 
gerous parturition  they  have  water  at  hand,  and  that  with 
self-possession  without  consternation,  attentively  and  fully, 
and  with  a  voice  truly  audible,  they  pronounce  the  words  of 
the  form  ;  together  with  a  proper  ablution  by  natural  water 
on  a  proper  part  of  the  body  of  the  person  to  be  baptized, 
according  to  what  was  said,  (No.  7.) 

"And  hence,  baptism  (even  supposing  that  the  proper 
ablution  has  taken  place)  is  at  least  very  much  endangered, 
when  certain  midwives  in  baptizing  a  child  not  entirely 
brought  forth,  lest  they  should  deject  the  mind  of  the  mo- 
ther, pronounce  in  a  very  low  and  modest  tone  :  /  baptize, 
and  after  a  little  delay,  thee,  and  again  after  a  short  pause, 
in  the  name  of  the  Father,  <S^c. 

Midwives  are  further  admonished  that  they  never  venture 
to  baptize  except  in  a  case  of  real  necessity  ;  if  they  do,  they 
commit  a  heinous  sin.  No  Clergyman  inferior  to  a  Deacon, 
and  no  layman  may  perform  the  peculiar  ceremonies  of 
giving  the  name,  presenting  the  godfather,  &c.  (No.  13.) 

One  person  may  baptize  several  at  the  same  time,  and  in 
a  valid  manner  by  a  sufficient  ablution  with  this  form,  1 
baptize  you :  but  this  is  not  proper  except  in  a  case  of 


CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS.  379 

necessity,  when  life  is  in  danger,  and  there  is  no  room  for 
delay. 

No  one  may  in  a  valid  manner  baptize  himself.  (No.  14.) 

Baptism  is  necessary  to  salvation  in  every  case  except 
martyrdom,  according  to  the  Scripture,  John  iii.  5 :  '  Except 
a  man  be  born  of  water  and  the  spirit,  he  cannot  enter  into 
the  kingdom  of  God."  (No.  18.) 

"  Is  baptism  or  a  baptismal  character  necessarily  a  pre- 
requisite for  other  sacraments  ? 

*'Ara5.  1.  Il  is  necessarily  a  pre-requisite  to  the  lawful  recep- 
tion of  the  others :  for  as  the  Council  of  Florence  says  : 
*  Holy  Baptism  holds  the  first  place,  because  it  is  the  gate  of 
spiritual  life :  for  by  it  we  are  made  members  of  Christ,  and 
of  the  body  of  the  Church.' 

"  2.  It  is  indubitable  that  the  sacrament  of  penance  neces- 
sarily requires  previous  baptism  for  its  validity ;  &c." 

"  In  the  practice  of  Christian  life  any  other  sacraments 
whatever  received  before  baptism,  are  to  be  considered  as 
null  and  void,  and  conferred  in  vain,  although  a  person  may 
have  received  them  in  good  faith,  believing  himself  to  be 
baptized :  because  the  validity  of  these  sacraments  is  at 
least  uncertain :  therefore  sacraments  of  this  kind  after  bap- 
tism are  at  least  to  be  repeated  conditionally,  if  the  baptized 
person  has  hitherto  been  without  them."   (No.  19.) 

Every  person  not  yet  baptized  in  a  valid  manner  is  a  fit 
subject  of  baptism,  and  is  bound  to  receive  this  sacrament.^ 
Even  those  who  are  born  without  original  sin,  as  John  the 
Baptist,  who  was  sanctified  from  his  mother's  womb.  In- 
fants are  also  fit  subjects  of  baptism.     (No.  20,  21.) 

"  May  infants  be  baptized  in  the  womb  of  the  mother  ? 

"  Ans.  1.  If  any  part  of  the  infant  has  already  been 
brought  forth  to  light,  it  may  and  should  be  baptized  on  that 
part,  in  case  of  necessity,  according  to  what  has  been  said. 
(No.  7.) 

"  2.  An  infant  living  in  the  womb  can  in  no  manner  be 
said  to  be  baptized  by  the  baptism  of  the  mother,  if  it  per- 
chance happens  that  she  is  then  baptized  :  because  the  infant 
is  distinct  from  the  mother,  both  as  to  soul  and  body- 

"  »3.  And  hence  if  it  is  so  shut  up  in  the  womb  of  the  mo- 
ther that  it  cannot  be  touched  and  washed  with  water,  bap- 


380  CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS. 

tism  is  attempted  uselessly  and  in  vain  :  because  ablution  is  a 
necessary  part  of  the  sacrament. 

"  But  the  question  is,  whether  a  child,  being  as  yet  en- 
tirely in  the  womb,  may  be  baptized  in  a  valid  manner,  if 
after  the  labour  has  commenced  it  can  be  sprinkled  with 
water  either  by  the  hand  or  by  some  other  instrument :  as  is 
svj/iciently  plain  from  the  testimony  of  physicians  and  mid- 
wives  may  be  done  ? 

"  The  ancient  and  many  more  recent  authors  hold  the 
negative  opinion,  and  prove  it  by  the  following  arguments  : 

"  1.  Because  by  baptism  a  person  is  born  again,  according 
to  that  passage,  John  iii.  3,  *  Except  a  man  be  born  a.gain,^ 
<SfC.,  also  v.  7  ;  but  no  one  can  be  said  to  be  born  again,  or 
to  be  re-born,  unless  he  was  born  before :  but  in  this  case 
the  child  has  not  been  born,  therefore,  &c. 

"  2.  By  the  authority  of  S.  Augustine,  whom  S.  Thomas 
cites,  «Sz;c. 

"  3.  By  the  Roman  ritual,  which  under  the  caption.  Con- 
cerning  children  to  be  baptized,  says :  *  No  one  who  is  shut 
up  in  the  womb  of  the  mother  ought  to  be  baptized.'  And 
our  pastoral  under  the  same  head ;  '  No  one  shut  up  in  the 
womb  of  the  mother  can  be  baptized.' 

"  Many  of  the  more  recent  authors,  however,  maintain  the 
affirmative  side,  which  they  also  attempt  to  prove  in  various 
ways. 

"  1.  The  infant  in  this  case  is  born  in  a  true  sense,  ac- 
cording to  Matt.  i.  20,  which  was  spoken  by  the  angel  to 
Joseph,  that  which  is  conceived  in  her  is  of  the  Holy  Ghost, 

"  2.  Such  a  one  is  so  far  born  as  to  contract  original  sin  ; 
therefore  also  that  the  remedy  for  it  be  applied. 

"  3.  An  infant  putting  forth  any  part  of  the  body  may  be 
baptized,  although  it  is  not  perfectly  born :  therefore  like- 
wise if  it  can  be  washed  in  the  womb. 

"  4.  A  child  is  baptized  in  a  valid  manner  which  has  by 
no  means  been  brought  to  light  by  birth,  but  has  been  cut  out 
of  the  womb  of  the  dead  mother,  (as  S.  Raymund,  on  this 
account  called  unborn,) ;  therefore  likewise  one  that  is  con- 
fined in  the  womb. 

*'  5.  Daelman  replies  to  the  authorities  of  the  other  c>pinion, 
that  the  rituals,  &c.,  proceeded  from  a  false  hypothesis,  as 


CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS.  381 

if  such  children  could  not  really  be  washed  ;  the  contrary  of 
which  is  certain  at  present. 

"  However  this  diversity  of  opinion  may  be,  the  latter  is 
certainly  probable  :  and  hence  in  a  case  of  necessity,  (in 
which  extremes  must  be  tried,)  it  takes  place,  baptizing  to  be 
sure  under  the  condition  :  if  thou  art  a  capable  subject;  but 
if  afterwards  such  a  child  is  brought  forth  to  the  light  ahve, 
it  will  have  to  be  conditionably  re-baptized.  In  this  case, 
however,  it  must  then  be  observed,  that  warm  water  be  ap- 
plied, as  cold  water  would  greatly  injure  the  mother :  farther, 
that  the  person  thus  baptizing  break  the  secondary  skin  in 
which  the  child  is  enclosed,  in  order  that  the  water  may  im- 
mediately wash  the  body  itself,  (and,  if  it  may  be,  the  head) : 
but  if  he  cannot  break  the  secondary  skin,  the  baptism  is  not 
therefore  to  be  omitted  ;  because  according  to  some,  this  skin 
is  a  part  of  the  infant  in  this  state."     (No.  23.) 

Concerning  the  Cesarean  Section.   (No.  24.) 

"  Is  it  lawful  to  Mil  a  pregnant  mother  that  the  fwtus 
may  he  extracted  alive,  and  he  baptized  ? 

"  Ans.  No  :  although  she  may  be  despaired  of  by  the  physi- 
cians :  because  it  is  never  proper  to  put  any  one  to  death  in 
order  that  assistance  may  be  given  to  another.  Some  ex- 
cept the  case,  when  the  mother  is  condemned  to  death  :  but 
it  is  better  to  defer  the  execution,  even  the  notification  of  con- 
demnation, until  she  is  delivered.  Some  also  say  that  the 
section  of  a  living  mother  is  lawful,  if  a  person  is  so  skilful 
that  he  can  cut  open  the  mother  with  a  well-grounded  hope 
of  her  recovery,  and  then  extract  the  child,  which  would 
otherwise  die  without  baptism  ;  especially  in  those  cases,  in 
which  this  section  is  the  only  means,  not  only  for  saving  the 
child,  but  also  for  preserving  the  mother.  But  if  a  pregnant 
woman  is  certainly  dead,  she  ought  immediately  to  be  cut 
open,  that  the  fcetus  may  then  be  extracted,  according  to  the 
prescription  of  the  Roman  ritual,  and  the  instructions  of  ^\, 
Carolus  Borr.,  &c.  ;  in  order  that  if  it  is  living,  it  may  be 
immediately  baptized  ;  but  if  it  is  found  to  be  certainly  dead, 
it  may  neither  be  baptized,  nor  buried  in  consecrated  ground  ; 
unless  it  had-  not  yet  been  extracted  from  the  womb  ,*  in  which 
case  it  may  be  left  there,  and  be  buried  with  the  mother  as  a 
part  of  her.  Among  the  signs  from  which  the  death  of  the 
32  * 


382  .  CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS. 

mother  is  inferred,  the  following  are  most  generally  assigned  : 
if  the  flame  of  a  candle  placed  near  the  mouth  is  not  at  all 
moved,  or  if  no  breath  is  perceptible  on  a  mirror  placed  near 
the  mouth  :  but  these  frequently  are  deceptive.  More  certain 
ones,  are  :  1.  If  the  eyes  become  altogether  flaccid,  and  lose 
their  brightness ;  2.  Stiffness  and  inflexibility  of  the  limbs, 
so  that  it  is  only  with  difficulty  that  another  position  can  be 
imparted  to  them ;  and  when  once  it  has  been  imparted  they 
do  not  restore  themselves  any  more  to  their  former  condition, 
unless  perhaps  slowly,  but  never  entirely ;  but  if  the  members 
restore  themselves  to  their  former  condition  with  force,  it  is 
a  sign  that  the  subject  is  still  alive.  As  the  want  of  per- 
ceptible motion  in  the  mother  is  not  a  certain  sign  of  death, 
much  less  is  it  so  in  her  foetus:  whose  death  should  be  con- 
sidered nearly  doubtful,  so  long  as  manifest  putrefaction  or 
disruption  of  members  is  not  observed  :  and  therefore  the 
operation  may  not  be  omitted,  because  no  motion  can  be  per- 
ceived in  the  womb.  It  is  advised,  that  a  tube  be  inserted  in 
the  mouth  of  the  mother,  when  dead,  and  in  a  similar  way 
patula  uteri  vagina  servetur,  in  order  that  heat  may  be  main- 
tained in  the  womb,  until  the  operation  is  commenced.  The 
said  operation,  however,  (which  is  commonly  called  the 
Caesarean,)  is  most  conveniently  performed  by  a  surgeon,  or 
some  other  person  skilled  in  this  thing;  in  the  absence  of 
whom  it  is  incumbent  on  the  priest  to  perform  the  same 
operation  ;  for  this  reason  the  pastors  of  villages  in  which 
there  is  a  want  of  surgeons,  &c.,  ought  to  be  acquainted  with 
the  mode  of  opening  the  womb  of  a  dead  mother  without  in- 
juring the  fcstus. 

*'  The  mode  of  opening  a  dead  pfegnant  mother. at  present 
practised  by  physicians,  and  according  to  them  the  more  easy 
and  expeditious  one,  is  the  following :  with  a  knife  or  scalpel 
let  a  transverse  scissure  be  made  in  the  upper  part  of  the  ab- 
domen, (or  a  little  below  the  thorax,  in  the  middle  of  the 
body,)  so  broad  and  deep  that  he  may  easily  introduce  his 
finger  into  the  cavity  of  the  abdomen ;  then  introducing  the 
finger,  dtc,  &c.,  &c. 

"  When  ovght  the  Ctesarean  section  to  he  instituted  1 
"  As  the  opinion  is  probable  which  says,  that  the  foetus  is 
alive  not  only  on  the  40th  or  80th  day,  but  immediately  upon 
the  conception,  or  at  least  in  the  first  days  after  the  concep- 


CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS.  383 

tion :  hence  it  is  proper  that  it  be  instituted  as  often  as  a  pro- 
bable suspicion  is  entertained  that  the  deceased  has  conceived  : 
but  whether  anyone  can  be  obliged  to  do  this  before  the  for- 
tieth day,  I  will  not  venture  to  affirm. 

"  These  things  and  very  many  more  most  worthy  to  be 
observed  may  be  seen  in  Cangiamila,  in  the  excellent  work 
on  Sacred  Embryology,  or  in  the  compendium  of  it  which 
Dinouart  has  published  in  the  French  tongue." 

Of  Baptizing  an  Abortive  Foetus.    (No.  25.) 

"  By  an  abortive  foetus  is  meant  one  which  is  prematurely 
brought  forth  to  light.  Ought  such  a  one  to  be  baptized  ? 
It  should  absolutely  be  baptized,  if  it  is  certain  that  it  is 
alive  :  conditionally,  if  it  is  doubtful  whether  it  lives  :  by  no 
means  can  it  be  baptized  if  it  is  admitted  that  it  is  dead. 
When  is  a  foetus  animated  with  a  rational  soul  ?  It  is  cer- 
tain that  the  foetus  is  alive  long  before  the  birth,  as  experi- 
ence proves  in  the  case  of  infants  cut  out  of  the  mother's 
womb ;  and  hence  Innocent  XL  justly  condemned  this  35 
proposition  :  '  It  seems  probable  that  every  foetus,  so  long  as 
it  is  in  the  womb,  is  without  a  rational  soul,  and  then  first 
begins  to  have  the  same,  when  it  is  born.'  However,  it  re- 
mains uncertain  at  what  time  precisely  the  fostus  is  alive. 
Many,  among  whom  is  Neesen,  contend  that  a  soul  is  never 
infused  into  any  except  a  well-organized  body.  Yet  very 
many  physicians,  and  more  recent  theologians  maintain  that 
this  takes  place  immediately  after  the  conception,  or  at  most, 
on  the  third  or  seventh  day  from  the  conception ;  as  may  be 
seen  in  the  dissertation.  On  baptizing  Abortions. 

"  Therefore,  abortions,  whether  they  have  all  the  members 
developed,  or  have  not  yet  obtained  that  perfection  :  the  for- 
mer if  they  give  evidence  of  life  by  motion,  are  absolutely 
baptized  :  conditionally,  however,  if  they  manifest  no  mo- 
tion, but  are  nevertheless  not  putrid  or  lacerated,  although 
they  may  appear  livid,  and  without  pulse,  respiration,  mo- 
tion, and  feeling.  The  latter,  if  they  but  appear  to  be  human 
embryos,  even  on  the  first  days  of  pregnancy,  are  baptized 
conditionally;  although  being  very  small  and  most  imper- 
fectly formed,  they  may  be  without  perceptible  motion  :  but 
they  are  first  baptized  whilst  enclosed  in  the  film,  in  order 
that  time  may  not  elapse,  at  the  risk  of  their  death,  when 


384  CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS. 

they  are  exposed  to  the  air :  afterwards  the  skin  is  cautiously- 
opened,  and  when  it  is  unclosed,  the  foetus  is  again  baptized, 
on  the  condition,  If  tJiou  art  capable,  ^c." 

Directions  are  then  given  in  order  to  ascertain  whether  the 
premature  birth  is  a  fcetus  or  not. 

Of  baptizing  Monsters  and  Idiots.   (No.  26.) 

"  '  A  monster,'  says  our  pastoral,  conformably  to  the  Ro- 
man ritual,  '  which  has  not  a  human  appearance,  ought  not  to 
be  baptized  :  but  the  decision  of  a  thing  of  this  kind  is  most 
properly  to  be  derived  from  the  head,  (which  is  the  seat  of 
reason  and  the  senses,) ;  therefore,  if  the  head  be  human,  or 
nearly  human,  it  may  be  baptized :  if  it  is  doubtful,  it  may 
be  baptized  on  the  condition,  if  thou  art  a  human  being  ;' 
and  thus  if  the  head  were  that  of  a  wild  beast,  and  the  other 
limbs  human,  it  ought  to  be  baptized  conditionally." 

But  the  decision  of  the  Roman  ritual  is  called  in  question, 
because  the  form  of  the  human  foetus,  in  the  womb  of  the 
mother,  is  so  soft  and  flexible,  that  it  may  be  deformed  or 
changed  by  the  violent  imagination  or  fright  of  the  mother, 
and  thus  the  foetus,  when  born,  may  exliibit  the  form  of  a 
brute ;  and  yet  there  is  no  sufficient  proof  to  show  that  the 
rational  soul,  by  which  the  foetus  was  probably  animated  be- 
fore the  deformity  was  occasioned,  has  subsequently  left  the 
body.  We  are  then  referred  to  the  Sacred  Embryology, 
for  information  relative  to  the  proper  course  to  be  pursued 
with  monsters  which  are  the  fruit  of  bestial  intercourse  ! 
Directions  are  then  offered  by  which  it  may  be  determined 
whether  the  monster  is  single  or  double. 

"  If  it  has  one  head  and  one  breast,  it  is  certain  that  it  is 
only  a  single  human  being,  although  it  may  have,  v.  g.,  three 
hands,  feet,  &c.,  and  then  it  may  be  simply  baptized.  Or  it 
is  plain  that  there  are  two  human  beings,  when  it  has  two 
heads,  and  distinct  breasts,  although  the  other  members  may 
not  be  double ;  and  then  they  may  be  baptized  separately : 
but  if  the  danger  of  death  is  imminent,  they  may  be  washed 
at  once,  by  saying,  I  baptize  you,  <^^c.  Suppose  it  is  doubt- 
ful whether  there  are  one  or  more  human  beings,  as  when  it 
has  two  heads  and  breasts  not  well  defined  :  then  one  may 
be  baptized  absolutely,  and   the  other  under  the  condition 


CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS.  385 

If  thou  art  not  baptized.     It  is  the  same  whether  it  has  two 
heads  and  one  breast,  or  the  contrary." 

My  apology  for  offering  the  preceding  Nos.  to  the  English 
reader  is,  that  no  adequate  conception  of  the  imbecile  and 
filthy  fanaticism  of  the  Church  of  Rome,  can  be  afforded, 
unless  these  features  are  exhibited  without  the  Latin  veil. 

Infants  are  to  be  baptized  as  soon  as  possible  after  birth. 
The  degree  of  delay  necessary  to  constitute  mortal  sin,  is  to 
be  determined  by  circumstances.  Adults,  if  in  danger  of 
death,  must  be  baptized  without  delay  ;  and  if  no  such  danger 
exists,  they  must  not  defer  long.  (No.  28.) 

The  effects  of  the  sacrament  of  baptism,  are  grace  and 
character.  Original  sin  is  remitted  in  baptism,  unless  some 
obstacle  is  in  the  way,  besides  all  personal  sins  committed 
before  baptism,  whether  mortal  or  venial.  All  temporal  and 
eternal  punishment,  due  on  account  of  past  sins,  are  also  re- 
mitted through  baptism.  (No.  29.) 

Baptism,  when  once  conferred  in  a  valid  manner,  is  not  to 
be  repeated,  for  the  following  reasons : 

"1.  Because  baptism  is  spiritual  regeneration:  and  hence 
as  there  is  but  one  carnal  birth  in  the  case  of  one  and  the 
same  person,  so  too  there  is  but  one  spiritual  birth. 

^'  2.  Because  ba'ptism  is  a  figure  of  the  death,  burial,  and 
resurrection  of  Christ.  But  Christ  died,  &c.,  but  once ;  there- 
fore, &c.  And  hence,  Heb.  ch.  vi.,  the  repetition  of  baptism 
is  compared  to  the  renewed  crucifixion  of  Christ. 

"  3.  Because  it  impresses  an  indelible  character  with  a 
kind  of  consecration  of  the  person. 

"  4.  Because  it  has  been  instituted  as  the  remedy  of  ori- 
ginal sin,  which  is  single  in  every  person,  and  once  remitted, 
never  returns."     (No.  32.) 

The  repetition  of  baptism  with  the  knowledge  that  it  has 
once  been  conferred  in  a  valid  manner,  is  a  grievous  sin  of 
sacrilege,  both  in  the  minister  and  in  the  recipient.  The 
penalty  of  this  crime  is  in  the  cival  law  capital,  both 
with  respect  to  the  person  rebaptizing,  and  the  person  rebap- 
tized.     (No.  33.) 

Whether  persons  baptized  by  midwives  are  to  be  rebap- 
tized,  depends  upon  the  knowledge,  prudence,  and  mode  of 


386  CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS. 

applying  the  matter  and  form  :  if  there  is  reason  to  believe 
that  owing  to  the  trepidation  or  ignorance  of  the  operator, 
something  essential  in  matter  or  form  has  been  omitted,  they 
must  be  rebaptized  ;  but  in  other  cases  all  that  is  necessary 
is  to  supply  the  usual  ceremonies.   (No.  36.) 

"  Are  those  who  have  been  baptized  by  heretics  to  be  re- 
baptized  ? 

"  In  the  first  place  they  are  not  to  be  rebaptized,  precisely 
for  the  reason  that  they  have  been  baptized  by  heretics  :  be- 
cause it  is  a  settled  point  in  the  faith,  that  a  heretic  who  ob- 
serves all  the  essentials,  baptizes  in  a  valid  manner.  Yet, 
because  there  is  just  reason  for  doubting  whether  sectarian 
heretics  rightly  apply  all  the  essentials,  as  it  has  been  learned 
from  experience  that  these  heretics  either  apply  rose-water 
for  the  sake  of  honour,  or  that  one  pours  the  water,  and  an- 
other pronounces  the  form,  or  that  they  are  frequently  negli- 
gent about  essentials  in  some  other  way,  v.  g.,  the  ablution ; 
hence  our  pastorale  has  decided,  as  well  the  modern  as  the 
ancient,  that  persons  baptized  by  those  heretics,  (say  Lu- 
therans, Calvinists,  Anabaptists,  and  other  sectarians  of  this 
kind,)  are  to  be  rebaptized  conditionally  when  they  are  con- 
verted from  heresy  to  the  faith,  &c.  But  as  there  is  no  rea- 
son for  doubting  that  all  the  essentials  are  duly  observed  by 
Jansenist  ministers,  hence  persons  baptized  by  them  ought  by 
no  means  to  be  rebaptized.  Neither  would  a  person  baptized 
by  any  heretic  whatsoever  have  to  be  rebaptized,  if  a  Catholic 
eye-witness,  and  one  skilled  in  the  point,  should  testify  that 
all  the  essentials  had  been  observed ;  unless  perhaps  there 
should  be  some  doubt  remaining  concerning  the  intention  of 
the  one  who  conferred  the  baptism  :  but  as  this  is  very  rare, 
Benedict  XIV.  observes  that  baptism  is  not  to  be  considered 
doubtful  on  this  ground,  only  that  the  heretic  (as  he  does  not 
believe  that  sins  are  remitted  through  baptism,)  does  not  con- 
fer it  for  the  remission  of  sins,  and  thus  his  intention  might 
appear  doubtful :  for  St.  Pius  V.  decreed  that  for  such  a  rea- 
son persons  baptized  by  Calvinists,  were  by  no  means  to  be 
rebaptized.  Braunman  rightly  observes,  that  the  priest  should 
attempt  nothing  in  relation  to  persons  baptized  by  heretics, 
until  the  opinion  of  the  bishop  has  been  ascertained."  (No. 
37.) 

In  case  of  necessity,  baptism  may  be  administered  any- 


CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS.  887 

where ;  but  when  there  is  no  necessity,  it  is  not  proper  to 
baptize  anywhere  but  in  a  church  which  has  a  baptismal 
font.  The  children  of  kings  and  princes  are  excepted  ;  these 
may  be  baptized  in  their  private  chapels.  By  princes  are 
meant  those  nobles  who  have  the  supreme  power  of  the  state, 
and  are  not  under  the  jurisdiction  of  any  king  or  prince ; 
whether  they  are  called  princes,  or  dukes,  or  marquises,  &c. 
Inferior  nobles  may  not  enjoy  this  privilege,  and  consequently 
the  priest  may  not  acquiesce  in  their  request,  if  they  ask  that 
their  children  may  be  solemnly  baptized  at  home,  but  he 
must  send  them  to  the  bishop  or  archpresbyter,  to  bring  a 
written  license.     (No,  38.) 

The  Ceremonies  of  baptism  must  be  duly  observed  in  its 
solemn  administration,  and  are  always  to  be  performed,  ex- 
cept in  a  case  of  necessity.  The  omission  of  the  ceremonies 
in  an  ordinary  case  is  a  grievous  offence  ?  These  ceremo- 
nies are  divided,  for  the  sake  of  distinction,  into  general  and 
particular.  The  latter  may  be  divided  into  ceremonies 
antecedent,  concomitant^  and  subsequent. 

"  The  general  ceremonies  are  five,  to  wit,  the  solemn  bene- 
diction of  the  font,  as  it  is  prescribed  in  the  missal;  the 
place;  the  time;  the  godfather,  and  the  giving  of  the  name. 
Concerning  this  conferring  of  the  name,  the  2d  provincial 
Synod  of  Mechlin  resolved,  'that  the  priests  take  care  as 
much  as  possible  that  the  names  of  Gentiles,  or  others  that 
are  profane,  be  not  given  to  children.'  And  our  pastorale : 
'But  the  priest  will  take  care  that  the  name  of  some  saint  be 
always  given  to  the  person  to  be  baptized,  by  whose  example 
he  may  be  excited  to  live  piously,  and  by  whose  patronage 
he  maybe  assisted.'  Authors  observe  that  the  name  of  some 
saint  of  the  New  Testament  is  more  properly  given  than  of 
the  Old  ;  also  rather  one  than  many. 

"  The  particular  ceremonies  preceding  baptism,  which  are 
performed  before  the  entrance  of  the  baptismal  font,  among 
various  others,  are  principally  four  :  viz.,  exorcism,  the  sign 
of  the  cross,  the  tasting  of  salt,  and  the  anointing  of  spittle. 
The  concomitant,  which  are  performed  after  entering  the 
baptistry,  are  also  principally  four  :  viz.,  renunciation,  the 
anointing  of  the  cnndidate  for  baptism  with  oil  of  catechu- 
mens, the  catechism,  and  the  inquiry  of  the  desire  of  re- 
ceiving baptism.     The   subsequent,  which    are   performed 


888  CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS. 

after  the  sacrament  has  been  finished,  are  chiefly  these  three  : 
the  anointing  of  the  baptized  person  with  chrism,  the  dona- 
tion of  a  white  garment,  and  the  delivery  of  a  hurningwax 
candle.  There  were  formerly  certain  special-  ceremonies, 
which  concerned  the  state  of  the  catechumens,  &c."  (No.  40.) 

Sponsors  are  to  be  employed  only  in  a  solemn  baptism, 
and  then  the  obligation  is  imperative  and  important.  The 
Council  of  Trent  has  fixed  the  number  at  two,  one  a  man, 
and  the  other  a  woman.  The  first  eflfect  is  a  spiritual  rela- 
tionship ;  the  second  effect  is  a  serious  obligation  of  providing 
that  the  baptized  person  be  duly  instructed  and  educated  in 
the  Christian  faith  and  life.  The  qualifications  of  a  sponsor, 
are  the  following.  He  must  be  baptized ;  he  must  not  be  an 
idiot;  he  must  be  designated  by  the  parents  or  others  on 
whom  the  care  devolves  of  having  the  infant  baptized;  or  in 
defect  of  these,  by  the  pastor,  to  whom  it  pertains  to  admit 
the  designated  sponsor,  or  for  a  just  cause  to  reject  him,  &c. 
The  priest  commits  a  grievous  sin  if  he  admits  more  than 
two  sponsors.     (No.  41.) 

Whether  a  Catholic  may  be  a  sponsor  for  a  child  that  is 
to  be  baptized  among  heretics,  is  a  controverted  point.  "  But 
It  is  certain  that  in  the  baptism  of  Catholics,  the  priest  ought 
rather  to  baptize  solemnly  without  sponsor  than  with  a  he- 
retic, because  of  two  evils  the  less  is  to  be  chosen."  (No.  42.) 

Every  priest  must  keep  a  baptismal  register,  in  which  the 
names  and  surnames  of  persons  baptized,  of  the  parents,  and 
of  the  godfathers  and  godmothers,  and  the  day  of  the  bap- 
tism, are  carefully  written  down.  It  is  a  grievous  sin  to  ne- 
glect this  duty.     (No.  43.) 


CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS.  389 


CHAPTER  XXXVI. 

Treatise  concerning  the   Sacrament  of  Confirma- 
tion. 

PREFACE. 

Decree  of  the  Council  of  Florence  for  the  instruction  of  the 
Armenians. 

"  The  second  sacrament  is  Confirmation,  the  matter  of  which  is 
chrism  prepared  from  oil,  which  signifies  clearness  of  conscience,  and 
from  balsam,  blessed  by  the  bishop,  which  signifies  the  odour  of  a  good 
reputation.  But  the  form  is  :  I  sign  thee  with  the  sign  of  the  cross^ 
and  I  confirm  thee  loith  the  chrism  of  salvation^  in  the  name  of  the 
Father^  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 

"  The  ordinary  minister  is  the  bishop.  And  whilst  a  mere  priest 
has  power  to  apply  other  unctions,  none  but  the  bishop  ought  to  confer 
this ;  because  we  read  of  the  apostles  only,  whose  room  the  bishops 
hold,  that  by  the  imposition  of  hands  they  gave  the  Holy  Spirit,  as  the 
reading  of  Acts  viii.  14,  manifests.  But  in  place  of  this  imposition  of 
hands,  confirmation  is  given  in  the  church.  It  is  recorded,  however, 
that  sometimes  by  the  dispensation  of  the  Apostolic  See,  from  a  reason- 
able and  urgent  cause,  even  a  simple  priest  has  administered  the  sa- 
crament of  confirmation,  with  chrism  prepared  by  the  bishop.  But  the 
effect  of  this  sacrament  is  the  increase  of  strength,  because  in  it  the 
Holy  Spirit  is  given,  just  as  it  was  imparted  to  the  apostles  on  the  day 
of  Pentecost,  to  wit,  in  order  that  a  Christian  may  boldly  confess  the 
name  of  Christ.  And  therefore  the  person  to  be  confirmed  is  anointed 
on  the  forehead,  where  the  seat  of  bashfulness  is,  that  he  may  not  blush 
to  confess  the  name  of  Christ,  and  especially  his  cross,  which  to  the 
Jews  indeed  is  a  stumbling-block,  and  to  the  Gentiles,  foolishness,  ac- 
cording to  the  apostle,  1  Cor.  i.,  for  which  reason  he  is  signed  with  the 
sign  of  the  cross." 

Canons  of  the  Council  of  Trent  concerning  Confirmation, 
"  1.  Whoever  shall  say  that  the  confirmation  of  baptized  persons  is 
a  needless  ceremony,  and  not  rather  a  true  and  proper  sacrament ;  or 
that  anciently  it  was  nothing  else  than  a  kind  of  catechising,  by  which 
33 


890  CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS. 

the  youth  expressed  the  reason  of  their  faith  before  the  Church ;  let 
him  be  accursed  ! 

"  2.  Whoever  shall  say  that  they  do  despite  to  the  Holy  Spirit,  who 
attribute  any  virtue  to  the  holy  chrism  of  confirmation ;  let  him  be 
accursed ! 

"3.  Whoever  shall  say  that  the  ordinary  minister  of  holy  confirma- 
tion is  not  the  bishop  alone,  but  any  mere  priest  whatsoever  ;  let  bira 
be  accursed ! 

This  sacrament  is  called  confirmation  from  its  effect,  in- 
asmuch as  by  it  spiritual  strength  is  conferred.  It  was  an- 
ciently called  the  sacrament  of  chrism^  or  the  sacrament  of 
unction,  "  also,  the  seal,  or  the  little  sign,  both  because 
when  the  chrism  is  applied  we  are  sealed  on  the  forehead  by 
the  sign  of  the  cross,  and  because  through  the  character  a 
seal  is  impressed  on  the  soul."  It  is  also  termed  perfection, 
consummation,  and  plenitude  of  grace,  because  in  it  is  spe- 
cially conferred  the  Holy  Spirit,  or  the  copious  grace  of  the 
Holy  Spirit.  For  the  special  benefit  and  edification  of  here- 
tics, it  is  defined :  A  sacrament  instituted  by  Christ  the 
Lord,  by  which  the  Holy  Spirit  is  given  to  baptized  per- 
sons, in  order  that  they  may  steadfastly  and  boldly  profess 
the  faith  of  Christ.     (No.  1.) 

It  is  a  matter  of  faith  that  confirmation  is  a  sacrament. 
"It  is  proved  1.  from  sacred  scripture.  Acts  viii.  14,  &c. 
*  When  the  apostles  had  heard — that  Samaria  had  received 
the  word  of  God,  they  sent  to  them  Peter  and  John.  Then 
they  laid  hands  upon  them,  and  they  received  the  Holy 
Ghost.'  The  same  is  maintained  ch.  xix.  6,  *  And  when  Paul 
had  imposed  his  hands  on  them,  the  Holy  Ghost  came  upon 
them,  and  they  spoke  tongues,  and  prophesied.' " 

Tradition  and  the  practice  of  the  Church  also  prove  it.  A 
reference  is  also  made  to  Matt.  xix.  15,  and  2  Cor.  i.  21,  22; 
but  these  latter  proof  texts  are  not  insisted  upon  as  positive. 
The  remote  matter  of  this  sacrament  is  chrism,  prepared 
from  oil  and  balsam,  blessed  by  the  bishop.  Whether  this 
mixture  is  essential  to  the  validity  of  the  sacrament  is  a  con- 
troverted point ;  and  so  is  the  question  whether  the  blessing 
or  consecration  of  the  chrism  is  requisite  in  order  to  its  va- 
lidity. It  is  also  a  disputed  point  whether  the  priest  ought 
not  to  be  permitted  to  consecrate  the  chrism,  as  well  as  the 
bishop.     The  proximate  matter  is  the  total  and  adequate 


CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS.  391 

application  of  the  chrism,  or  the  anointing  of  chrism,  and  the 
imposition  of  hands.  This  application  must  be  made  on  the 
forehead  and  in  the  form  of  a  cross.  The  sacrament  is 
valid  "  whether  this  anointing  be  performed  with  the  thumb 
of  the  right  hand,  (as  the  pontifical  manual  prescribes,)  or 
with  another  finger  of  the  right  or  left  hand :"  but  it  is  es- 
sential that  it  be  made  with  the  hand,  and  not  with  a  rod,  or 
any  other  instrument,  as  it  ought  to  be  done  by  imposition 
of  hands.     (No.  5.) 

The  form  is  among  the  Latins,  I  sign  thee  with  the  sign 
of  the  cross^  and  I  confirm  thee  with  the  chrism  of  salva- 
tion, in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the 
Holy  Ghost.     (No.  6.) 

The  proper  minister  is  the  bishop.     (No.  7.) 

According  to  modern  usage,  the  age  at  which  confirmation 
is  regularly  conferred,  is  not  less  than  seven  years  ;  there 
are  exceptions  in  which  it  may  be  performed  even  earlier. 
Idiots  are  to  be  confirmed,  "  because  they  are  capable  of 
character,  and  of  sanctifying,  and  even  of  sacramental  grace, 
&c."     (No.  8.) 

As  for  the  dispositions  requisite  for  a  person  who  is  to  be 
confirmed,  a  state  of  grace  is  necessary  in  an  adult.  Chil- 
dren, although  not  seven  years  old,  should  be  previously  dis- 
posed to  confession ;  instruction,  reverence,  and  devotion 
suited  to  their  age,  are  also  required.  As  for  the  corporeal 
preparation,  observe,  1.  When  it  can  conveniently  be  done, 
it  is  more  proper  that  it  be  given  and  received  fasting.  2.  That 
the  persons  to  be  confirmed  have  the  forehead  open  and 
clean.  3.  That  the  dress,  especially  of  the  girls,  be  decent 
and  modest.  4.  That  each  one  of  the  persons  to  be  con- 
firmed have  a  ribbon,  or  a  linen  band,  clean,  and  of  proper 
size,  with  which  the  forehead,  when  anointed  with  the  chrism, 
may  be  covered,  and  may  remain  bound,  out  of  reverence  to 
the  sacred  chrism :  if  however  any  one  at  a  more  advanced 
age  is  confirmed,  the  band  may  soon  be  laid  aside  by  the 
priest,  before  the  confirmed  person  goes  out  of  the  church. 
(No.  9.) 

The  effects  of  this  sacrament  are,  I.  Sanctifying  grace, 
by  which  the  person  is  strengthened,  having  annexed  the 
abundance  of  the  virtues  and  of  the  seven  gifts  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,  of  which  Is.  xi.  2,  3  ;  the  virtues  of  faith  and  boldness 


392  CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS. 

are  specially  augmented.  2.  Sacramental  grace,  or  actual 
grace  dispensed  whenever  opportunity  is  afforded  of  strenu- 
ously and  boldly  professing  the  faith  with  heart  and  mouth. 
3.  The  third  effect  is  character,  by  reason  of  which  this  sa- 
crament can  never  be  repeated.     (No.  10.) 

Whether  confirmation  is  necessary  to  salvation  is  a  dis- 
puted point,  but  the  more  probable  opinion  is  the  affirmative. 
(No.  11.) 

A  sponsor  is  to  be  employed  in  confirmation.  "  Just  as  a 
sponsor  in  baptism  contracts  the  obligation  of  instructing  the 
baptized  person  in  the  faith  and  in  Christian  morals  ;  so  the 
person  holding  the  confirmand  in  confirmation  like  a  veteran 
soldier,  should  instruct  the  confirmed  person,  as  yet  a  novice, 
more  perfectly  in  the  Christian  warfare."     (No.  12.) 

The  principal  ceremonies  of  confirmation  are  the  following : 

"  So  soon  as  the  bishop  has  pronounced  the  form  of  the 
sacrament,  he  inflicts  a  slight  blow  on  the  jaw  of  the  con- 
firmed person  :  '  in  order  that  he  may  remember  that  it  be- 
hoves him  as  a  brave  combatant  to  be  always  ready  to  bear 
with  an  indomitable  spirit,  all  adversity  for  the  name  of 
Christ,'  says  the  Roman  Catechism,  num.  20,  on  confirma- 
tion. 

"  At  the  same  time  the  bishop  prays  for  peace,  saying : 
Peace  be  with  thee  (Pax  tecum)  :  *  in  order  that  (says  the 
Roman  Catechism,)  by  this  peace  the  confirmed  may  under- 
stand that  he  has  obtained  the  plenitude  of  celestial  grace, 
and  the  peace  which  passes  all  understanding.' 

*'  These  things  having  been  performed  by  the  bishop,  the 
forehead  of  the  confirmed  is  bound  with  a  band  or  linen  rib- 
bon, both  out  of  reverence  for  the  sacred  chrism,  and  in 
order  to  designate,  that  the  grace  of  the  Holy  Spirit  just  ob- 
tained is  to  be  diligently  preserved,  and  also,  (says  the 
Mechlinian  pastorale,)  as  the  symbol  of  a  mind  prepared  for 
all  reproach  and  adversity  for  the  name  of  Christ,  whose  face 
was  veiled  and  smitten  with  blows. 

"  Anciently  the  ribbon  was  kept  tied  for  seven  days  ;  af- 
terwards, in  some  churches,  for  only  three  days  ;  but  now  it 
is  usually  laid  aside  on  the  following  day,  and  the  forehead 
is  wiped  off  on  the  same  day  :  concerning  which  the  Mech- 
linian pastorale  thus  directs  :  *  Let  the  ribbon  be  laid  aside 
by  the  priest,  and  preserved  in  the  sacristy  or  some  other 


CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS.  393 

proper  place,  to  be  burned  to  sacred  ashes  on  the  day  of 
ashes  in  Lent.' 

"  All  being  now  confirmed,  the  bishop  prays  over  all  at 
once,  that  God  would  confirm  the  grace  received,  by  perfect- 
ing it  in  them.  Finally,  he  bestows  upon  them  the  benedic- 
tion, before  which  no  one  of  the  confirmed  may  depart,  &c. 
And  likewise,  all  are  to  be  present,  at  all  the  ceremonies, 
from  the  commencement^"  &c. 


CHAPTER  XXXVII. 

Treatise  concerning  the   Adorable  Sacrament  op 
THE  Eucharist. 

PREFACE. 

Decree  of  the  Council  of  Florence  for  the  instruction  of  the 
Armenians. 

"The  third  is  the  Sacrament  of  the  Eucharist,  the  matter  of  which  is 
wheaten  bread,  and  wine  from  the  vine,  with  which,  before  the  conse- 
cration, a  very  small  quantity  of  water  should  be  mixed.  But  water 
is  thus  mixed,  since  it  is  believed  that  the  Lord  himself  instituted  this 
sacrament  in  wine  mixed  with  water  ;  besides  because  this  agrees  with 
the  representation  of  our  Lord's  passion :  because  it  is  recorded  that 
blood  and  water  flowed  forth  from  the  side  of  Christ :  and  also  because 
this  is  proper  to  signify  the  effect  of  this  sacrament,  which  is  the  union 
of  Christian  people  with  Christ :  for  water  signifies  the  people,  accord- 
ing to  Revel,  xvii.  1 5.  And  he  said  to  me,  the  waters  which  thou  sawest^ 
where  the  harlot  sitteth,  are  peoples,  and  nations,  and  tongues, 

"  The  form  of  this  sacrament  are  the  words  of  the  Saviour,  by  which 
this  sacrament  is  performed  :  for  the  priest,  speaking  in  the  person  of 
Christ,  performs  this  sacrament :  for  by  virtue  of  the  words  themselves, 
the  substance  of  the  bread  is  converted  into  the  body,  and  the  substance 
of  the  wine  into  the  blood,  of.  Christ ;  yet  so  that  Christ  is  contained 
entire  under  the  form  of  bread,  and  entire  under  the  form  of  wine  : 
33* 


394  CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS. 

Christ  is  entire  also  under  every  part  of  the  consecrated  host,  and  of 
the  consecrated  wine,  after  a  separation  has  been  made.  The  effect  of 
this  sacrament  which  it  produces  in  the  soul  of  a  worthy  partaker,  is 
the  union  of  the  person  to  Christ,"  &c. 

Canons  of  the  Council  of  Trent  concerning  the  Most  Holy  Sacrament 
of  the  Eucharist. 

"  1.  Whoever  shall  deny  that  in  the  sacrament  of  the  Most  Holy 
Eucharist  are  contained  truly,  really,  and  substantially  the  body  and 
blood,  together  with  the  soul  and  divinity  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
and  therefore  the  entire  Christ ;  but  shall  say  that  he  is  in  it  only  as  in 
a  sign,  or  figure,  or  virtue ;  let  him  be  accursed  ! 

"  2.  Whoever  shalt  say  that  in  the  most  holy  sacrament  of  the  Eu- 
charist, the  substance  of  bread  and  wine  remains  together  with  the 
body  and  blood  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ ;  and  shall  deny  that  wonder- 
ful and  singular  conversion  of  the  whole  substance  of  the  bread  into 
the  body,  and  of  the  whole  substance  of  the  wine  into  the  blood,  only 
the  forms  of  bread  and  wine  remaining  :  which  conversion  indeed,  the 
Catholic  Church  most  aptly  calls  transubsta;ntiation ;  let  him  be  ac- 
cursed ! 

"  3.  Whoever  shall  deny  that  in  the  adorable  sacrament  of  the  Eu- 
charist, the  entire  Christ  is  contained  under  each  kind  and  under  the 
single  parts  of  each  kind,  when  a  separation  is  made  ;  let  him  be  ac- 
cursed ! 

"  4.  Whoever  shall  say  that  the  body  and  blood  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ  are  not  present  in  the  admirable  Eucharist  so  soon  as  the  con- 
secration is  performed,  but  only  in  the  use  when  it  is  received,  and 
neither  before  nor  after  ;  and  that  the  true  body  of  our  Lord  does  not 
remain  in  the  hosts,  or  consecrated  morsels,  which  are  reserved  or  left 
after  the  communion ;  let  him  be  accursed ! 

"  5.  Whoever  shall  say  either  that  remission  of  sins  is  the  principal 
fruit  of  the  most  holy  Eucharist,  or  that  no  other  effects  proceed  from 
it ;  let  him  be  accursed  ! 

"  6.  Whoever  shall  affirm  that  in  the  holy  sacrament  of  tlie  Eucha- 
rist, Christ  the  only-begotten  Son  of  God,  is  not  to  be  adored  even  with 
the  external  worship  of  latria ;  and  therefore  that  the  Eucharist  is  to  be 
honoured  neither  with  peculiar  festive  celebration,  nor  to  be  solemnly 
carried  about  in  processions  according  to  the  laudable  and  universal 
rite  and  custom  of  the  Church,  or  that  it  is  not  to  be  held  up  publicly 
before  the  people  that  it  may  be  adored,  and  that  its  worshippers  are 
idolaters ;  let  him  be  accursed  ! 

"  7.  Whoever  shall  say  that  it  is  not  lawful  that  the  holy  Eucharist 


CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS.  395 

he  reserved  in  the  sacristy,  but  that  it  must  necessarily  be  distributed  to 
those  who  are  present  immediately  after  the  consecration  ;  or  that  it  is 
not  proper  that  it  be  carried  in  procession  to  the  sick ;  let  him  be  ac- 
cursed ! 

"  8.  Whoever  shall  say  that  Christ  as  exhibited  in  the  Eucharist,  is 
eaten  only  spiritually,  and  not  also  sacramentally  and  really  ;  let  him 
be  accursed ! 

"  9.  Whoever  shall  deny  that  each  and  every  one  of  Christ's  faithful 
of  both  sexes,  when  they  have  attained  to  years  of  discretion,  are 
obliged  at  least  once  every  year,  at  Easter,  to  commune  according  to 
the  precept  of  holy  mother  Church  ;  let  him  be  accursed ! 

"  10.  Whoever  shall  say  that  it  is  not  lawful  for  the  officiating 
priest  to  administer  the  communion  to  himself;  let  him  be  accursed  ! 

"11.  Whoever  shall  affirm  that  faith  alone  is  a  sufficient  prepara- 
tion for  taking  the  sacrament  of  the  most  holy  Eucharist;  let  him  be 
accursed !  And  lest  so  great  a  sacrament  be  taken  unworthily,  and 
therefore  to  death  and  condemnation,  the  said  holy  synod  doth  decree 
and  declare,  that  sacramental  confession  must  necessarily  precede  in 
the  case  of  those  whom  conscience  accuses  of  mortal  sin,  if  a  confessor 
is  at  hand,  however  contrite  they  may  suppose  themselves  to  be.  But 
if  any  one  shall  presume  to  teach,  preach,  or  pertinaciously  assert,  or 
in  publicly  disputing,  to  defend  the  contrary,  let  him  by  this  very  act 
be  excommunicated.'* 

Canons  of  the  same  Council  concerning  the  communion  of  children^ 
and  in  both  kinds: 

"  1.  Whoever  shall  say  that  each  and  every  one  of  Christ's  faithful 
ought  to  take  both  kinds  of  the  most  holy  sacrament  of  the  Eucharist, 
by  the  command  of  God,  or  because  necessary  to  salvation;  let  him  be 
accursed ! 

"  2.  Whoever  shall  say  that  the  holy  Catholic  Church  has  not  been 
induced  by  just  causes  and  reasons,  to  administer  the  communion  to 
the  laity,  and  also  to  the  clergy  not  officiating,  only  under  the  form  of 
bread  ;  or  that  she  has  erred  in  this ;  let  him  be  accursed  1 

"  3.  Whoever  shall  deny  that  the  whole  and  entire  Christ,  the  fountain 
and  author  of  all  graces,  is  received  under  the  one  form  of  bread,  be 
cause  as  some  falsely  assert,  he  is  not  received  under  both  kinds,  ac 
cording  to  the  institution  of  Christ ;  let  him  be  accursed ! 

"  4.  Whoever  shall  say  that  the  communion  of  the  Eucharist  is  ne- 
cessary for  little  children  before  they  have  attained  to  years  of  discre 
tion  ;  let  him  be  accursed  !"  &c. 


396  CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS. 

As  this  Sacrament  has  reference  to  the  present,  past,  and 
future,  its  names  are  applied  with  reference  to  these  rela- 
tions. In  respect  to  the  past,  inasmuch  as  it  is  commemo- 
rative of  the  Lord's  passion,  it  is  called  a  sacrifice,  also  the 
host,  "  As  it  signifies  something  present,  or  is  a  demonstrative 
sign*  of  the  ecclesiastical  unity  by  which  we  are  specially 
united  to  Christ,  it  is  called  the  communion.  Inasmuch  as 
it  designates  something  future,  or  is  a  prognostic  sign  of  the 
enjoyment  of  God  in  the  heavenly  country,  it  is  called  the 
viaticum]  because  here  he  affords  us  a  way  of  arriving 
there :  and  so  also  it  is  called  the  eucharist,  that  is  good 
grace :  or  because  it  really  contains  Christ,  who  is  the  foun- 
tain of  grace  :  or  also  according  to  others,  because  Christ  in 
,  the  institution  of  this  sacrament  gave  thanks  and  is  still  daily 
offered  in  giving  thanks  to  God.  It  is  also  Ccdled  bread, 
generally  with  the  addition  of  eternal  life,  of  angels,  &c.; 
or  the  body  of  Christ,  the  body  of  the  Lord  ;  also,  the  sacred 
feast,  the  table  of  the  Lord:  ^^the  supper,  because  it  was 
instituted  in  the  last  supper :  but  because  the  heretics  abuse 
this  name  that  they  may  persuade  that  the  sacrament  con- 
sists in  the  use  or  the  act  of  supping,  and  that  fasting  may 
not  be  enjoined  at  its  reception,  therefore,  this  name  is  to  be 
seldom  used."     (No.  1.) 

The  sacrament  of  the  Eucharist  is  usually  defined ;  "  a 
sacrament  instituted  by  Christ  the  Lord,  which  under  the 
consecrated  forms  of  bread  and  wine,  contains  the  body 
and  blood  of  Christ,  for  the  spiritual  refreshment  of  man" 
It  differs  from  the  other  sacraments,  principally  in  two  re- 
spects : 

"  1.  Because  it  consists  in  a  permanent  thing,  the  other 
sacraments  being  only  a  transient  action. 

"2.  Because  the  Eucharist  contains  Christ  himself,  the 
author  of  all  holiness,  and  the  fountain  of  all  grace,  truly, 
really,  and  substantially ;  but  the  other  sacraments  have 
only  a  certain  instrumental  virtue  imparted  by  Christ.  And 
hence  this  sacrament  is  far  more  important  than  the  rest,  is 
called  b)'-  more  distinguished  names,  and  is  termed  antono- 
mastically  the  sacrament.''''     (No.  3.) 

The  matter  to  be  consecrated  should  be  morally  so  present 
that  it  may  be  perceptibly  designated  by  the  pronoun  hoc 
and  hie :  and  this  is  requisite  for  the  validity  of  the  con- 


•  CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS.  397 

secration,  the  demonstrative  words  of  which  would  otherwise 
not  be  verified.  Hence  we  may  infer  that  matter  placed 
behind  the  priest's  back,  a  host  lying  under  a  napkin,  under 
the  bottom  of  the  cup,  is  not  consecrated  in  a  valid  man- 
ner. It  is  not  necessary,  however,  that  the  matter  be  seen 
or  touched,  or  that  it  should  be,  as  it  were,  struck  by  the  sound 
of  the  words,  but  it  is  sufficient  that  it  is  demonstrable  by  the 
pronoun  hoc  and  hie,  {this,)  either  in  itself  or  in  something  else 
which  contains  it.  Thus,  hosts  lying  in  a  heap  one  on  top 
of  the  other  are  duly  consecrated,  or  if  they  are  shut  up  in  a 
case  or  pixis  ;  according  to  the  rubrics  however,  the  pixis  con- 
taining the  hosts  to  be  consecrated,  ought  to  be  open  when 
the  ceremony  is  performed.  The  practice  of  some  unman- 
nerly priests,  who  put  their  mouth  too  near,  and  as  it  were 
breathe  upon  the  cup  and  the  bread,  is  reproved  ;  the  rubrics 
prescribe  merely  that  in  the  consecration,  the  priest  stand 
with  his  head  bowed,  and  that  he  pronounce  the  words  dis- 
tinctly, secretly,  and  reverently. 

"  Should  any  priest  having  before  him  eleven  hosts  intend 
to  consecrate  only  ten,  not  determining  which  ten  were  meant, 
the  consecration  is  invalid.  Not  so,  however,  if  thinking 
there  were  but  ten,  he  wished  to  consecrate  all  which  he  had 
before  him : — and  therefore,  every  priest  ought  always  to 
have  the  intention  of  consecrating  all  the  hosts  which  he  has 
before  him.  On  account  of  this  intention,  if  the  priest  with- 
out knowing  it  has  in  his  hands  two  greater  hosts,  they  are 
both  consecrated,  and  in  such  a  case  the  Roman  missal  pre- 
scribes that  both  must  be  taken.  Hosts  placed  upon  the 
altar  altogether  without  the  knowledge  of  the  priest  are  not 
consecrated :  for  the  will  is  not  exercised  on  any  thing  un- 
known. The  case  is  different  however  if  the  priest  himself, 
or  any  one  else  by  his  direction,  or  with  his  observation,  has 
brought  them  to  the  altar  to  be  consecrated  :  although  at  the 
time  of  consecration  he  may  not  have  thought  of  them  : 
because  the  virtual  intention  remains ;  only  at  the  time  of 
consecration  the  hosts  should  be  placed  in  such  a  way  and 
place  as  that  in  which  hosts  are  usually  deposited,  which  are 
to  be  consecrated.  When  the  cup  has  been  consecrated,  the 
drops  of  wine  adhering  to  the  outside  of  the  cup,  are  not 
consecrated,  supposing  that  the  ordinary  intention  has  been 
afforded:   and  hence  such  drops  may  without  scruple  be 


398  CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS.  • 

wiped  off  even  after  the  consecration.  Opinions  vary,  how- 
ever, concerning  the  drops  adhering  to  the  cup  inside,  or 
within  the  vessel,  and  separated  from  the  whole :  and  there- 
fore let  the  priest  be  careful  to  wipe  them  off  before  the 
oblation  or  consecration :  after  the  consecration,  they  may 
not  be  wiped  off  because  they  have  then  perhaps  been  con- 
secrated," &c.     (No.  11.) 

The  kind  of  bread  proper  for  consecration  is  wheat  bread 
only,  truly  and  properly  so  called.  And  the  water  used  in 
kneading  the  flour  should  be  natural;  the  Roman  missal 
considers  it  doubtful  whether  the  sacrament  is  performed 
when  the  bread  is  made  of  rose-water  or  any  other  distilla- 
tion.    (No.  13.) 

Whether  the  bread  is  leavened  or  unleavened  does  not 
affect  the  essence  or  validity  of  the  sacrament.  The  Greek 
church  uses  leavened  bread,  the  Roman  unleavened.  But 
each  must  scrupulously  observe  the  custom  peculiar  to  it. 

The  kind  of  wine  is  the  fruit  of  the  vine  and  that  only 
which  is  properly  wine,  and  is  simply  so  called ;  whether 
white  or  red,  French  or  Spanish ;  or  the  wine  miraculously 
produced,  such  as  that  was  in  Cana  of  Galilee.  Insufficient 
matter  are  artificial  wines  made  out  of  grain,  apples,  pears, 
or  other  fruits ;  also  vinegar  prepared  from  wine  and  ver- 
juice or  the  liquor  prepared  out  of  unripe  grapes,  &c.  Must, 
or  wine  recently  pressed  out  of  grapes,  is  indeed  matter  suf- 
ficient, but  it  is  not  lawful  to  perform  the  celebration  with  it 
on  account  of  its  impurity,  except  in  a  case  of  necessity. 
Whether  congealed  wine  may  be  used  or  not  is  a  disputed 
point ;  the  probable  opinion  is  that  it  may  be.  The  respect 
due  to  so  great  a  mystery  requires  that  the  priests  and  others 
whose  business  it  is  should  be  very  careful  with  respect  to 
the  adulterations  of  the  wine,  and  also  of  the  bread.  The 
custom  of  some,  who  contract  with  the  merchant,  who  will 
furnish  the  wine  for  the  Eucharist  at  the  lowest  rate,  is 
severely  reprimanded,  for  the  obvious  reason  that  in  order 
to  make  profit  or  at  least  not  lose  on  his  contract,  he  will  be 
apt  to  furnish  the  vilest  wines.     (No.  15.) 

Water  is  to  be  mixed  with  the  wine,  but  it  is  not  essen- 
tial to  the  validity  of  the  sacrament.  But  now  the  question 
arises,  what  becomes  of  this  water  in  the  consecration  7  There 
are  three  opinions  mentioned  by  Innocent  III.     The  first  is 


CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS.  399 

that  this  water  is  turned  into  the  water,  which  flowed  from 
the  side  of  Christ ;  but  this  is  rejected  as  improbable.  The 
second  is  that  the  water  is  not  changed  into  the  blood  of 
Christ,  and  this  opinion  also  is  scarcely  probable.  The 
third  is  that  it  is  changed  into  the  blood  of  Christ ;  and  this 
may  be  held  as  certain.  But  there  is  a  greater  controversy 
whether  this  water  is  immediately  converted  into  the  blood 
of  Christ ;  or  whether  it  is  first  converted  into  wine,  and  thus 
mediately  into  the  blood  of  Christ.  The  latter  is  evidently 
the  orthodox  view.     (No.  16.) 

The  form  of  administering  the  Eucharist  in  general,  is. 
Take,  and  eat,  this  is  my  body.  Observe  that  it  is  not  suf- 
ficient to  pronounce  the  words  of  consecration  in  a  narrative 
style,  but  it  is  necessary  to  pronounce  them  by  way  of  asser- 
tion :  for  the  priest  does  not  merely  narrate  that  Christ  by 
these  words  changed  the  bread  and  wine  into  his  body  and 
blood,  but  he  himself  also  as  a  secondary  minister  effects  this 
change.  According  to  St.  Thomas,  the  words  of  consecra- 
tion take  effect  at  the  end  of  the  sentence  of  consecration,  or 
in  the  last  instant  of  pronouncing  the  words,  hoc  est  corpus 
meum,  "  this  is  my  body,"  which  is  the  usual  form  of  con- 
secrating the  bread.  Daelman  affirms  that  the  consecration 
would  not  be  valid,  if  in  place  of  hoc,  illud,  or  istud  should 
be  used.  (Both  these  words  mean  this.)  Sylvius  and  some 
others  admit  the  fact  with  respect  to  illud,  but  not  to  istud. 
If  hic,  here,  should  be  said  instead  of  hoc,  the  consecration 
would  unquestionably  be  invalid.  But  if  a  priest  through 
ignorance  or  carelessness  should  say  hic  in  the  masculine 
instead  of  hoc,  the  consecration  would  be  valid,  because 
though  he  would  sin  against  latinity,  yet  he  would  not  imply 
a  sense  substantially  different  from  that,  which  the  words 
have  when  properly  pronounced. 

"  The  word  corpus  is  taken  properly  and  strictly,  as  it  is 
distinguished  from  blood,  comprehending  flesh,  bones,  nerves, 
&c.,  and  hence  if  instead  of  the  word  corpus,  (body)  caro, 
(flesh)  should  be  said,  the  consecration  would  not  be  valid ; 
so  also  if  the  priest  should  say  this  is  the  body  of  Christ, 
hoc  est  corpus  Christi.     (Nos.  17,  and  18.) 

The  usual  form  of  consecrating  the  cup  is  this  ; 

"  For  this  is  the  cup  of  my  blood  of  the  new  and  eternal 
testament,  the  mystery  of  faith,  which  shall  be  shed  for  you 


400  CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS. 

and  for  many  for  the  remission  of  sins."  The  only  essen- 
tial words  in  this  form  are  "  this  is  the  cup  of  my  blood.'* 
(No.  19.) 

The  real  presence  of  Christ  in  the  Eucharist. 

"The  Catholic  dogma  concerning  the  real  presence  of 
Christ  in  the  Eucharist,  up  to  this  time,  steadfast  and  un- 
doubted among  the  faithful,  Berengarius,  the  Archdeacon 
&c.,  in  the  XI.  cent.,  first  openly  denied,  asserting  that  the 
Eucharist  is  the  mere  sign  of  the  body  of  Christ.  This 
heresy,  however,  was  assailed  by  most  learned  men  and 
condemned  in  various  councils :  and  although  Berengarius 
several  times  relapsed,  yet  many  attest  that  he  still  died, 
penitent  and  a  catholic.  The  Albigenses  and  Wiclif  followed 
Berengarius,  and  Wiclif  taught  that  the  substance  of  the 
material  wine  and  of  the  material  bread  remain  in  the  sacra- 
ment of  the  altar. 

"  In  the  XVI.  cent.,  Carlostadt,  Zuinglius,  Bucer,  Calvin, 
and  after  him  the  Calvinists  likewise  taught  that  the  Eucha- 
rist is  the  mere  and  naked  figure  of  Christ's  body.  Against 
whom  the  Council  of  Trent  thus  defined,  Sess.  13.,  Can.  1. 
(See  preface  to  this  chap.) 

^^  Luther  would  gladly  have  denied  this  truth,  but  in  his 
letter  to  the  Argentines,  he  confesses  himself  convinced  by 
the  most  evident  testimonies  of  Scripture.  Declaring  war 
however,  upon  the  Roman  Church,  he  maintained  the  im- 
panation  or  that  the  substance  of  the  bread  and  wine  remains 
with  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ.  Another  error  of  Luther 
is,  that  Christ  is  not  present  in  the  Eucharist  except  in  the 
act  of  receiving  it,  &c." 

"  From  which  it  is  moreover  inferred  that  Christ  must  be 
adored  in  this  sacrament  with  the  worship  which  is  due  to 
God,  as  the  council  of  Trent  teaches.  This  Calvin  and  the 
Calvinists  simply  deny.  The  adoration  to  Luther,  however, 
appeared  at  first  a  thing  indiflferent ;  afterwards  also  useful 
and  necessary  :  but  of  the  modern  Lutherans  some  admit 
the  adoration  in  receiving ;  others  do  not  admit  it,  even  in  the 
reception."     (No.  20.) 

The  real  presence  is  proved  from  John  chap.  vi.  "  It 
is  to  be  premised,  that  three  parts  are  distinguished  in  the 
chapter  above  cited.     In  the  first  as  far  as  v.  25,  the  question 


CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS.  401 

is  concerning  material  food,  or  the  multiplication  of  the  five 
loaves,  with  which  Christ  fed  the  five  thousand  people.  In 
the  second,  the  question  is  as  far  as  v.  52,  concerning  food 
purely  spiritual.,  namely  faith  in  the  incarnate  Messiah. 
But  in  the  third  part  from  v.  52,  to  the  end  of  the  chapter, 
the  question  is  concerning  the  real  and  sacramental  eating 
of  the  flesh  of  Christ.  Having  premised  these  things,  this 
last  is  proved. 

"  Because  Christ  promising  this  sacrament  says,  v.  52  : 
the  bread  which  I  will  give  is  my  flesh  for  the  life  of  the 
world  ;  signifying  that  his  own  flesh  was  truly  to  be  given 
by  way  of  food,  not  only  in  the  sign  and  figure :  because  v. 
69,  he  places  it  in  opposition  to  the  manna,  which  was  the 
figure  of  this  sacrament.  He  designates  also  that  his  flesh 
was  to  be  really  given,  and  not  only  by  faith :  because  he  is 
speaking  of  a  thing  not  yet  done,  but  future  :  but  the  spiri- 
tual eating  through  faith  both  existed  then,  and  also  had 
existed  under  the  old  law :  nor  otherwise,  v.  56,  ought  he  to 
have  distinguished  between  spiritual  meat  and  drink.  Like- 
wise he  does  not  signify  that  his  own  flesh  was  to  be  given 
only  by  its  virtue  and  energy,  but  substantially,  as  is  gathered 
from  the  circumstance  that  the  Jews  disputing  about  these 
words  said  v.  53  :  How  can  this  man  give  us  his  own  flesh  to 
eat  ?  To  whom  Christ  said,  v.  54  :  Unless  you  eat  the  flesh 
of  t'he  Son  of  man,  (S^c. :  and  on  this  account  still  more  of- 
fended, they  said,  v.  61,  This  saying  is  hard,  &c.,  which 
however,  he  still  confirmed,  v.  63,  by  the  testimony  of  the 
future  ascension  of  his  body:  and  when,  v.  67  :  many  of  his 
disciples  went  back,  he  did  not  correct  their  interpretation  ; 
which  the  infinite  goodness  of  the  excellent  master,  seemed 
in  accordance  with  his  custom  to  require,  if  he  had  meant 
those  words  concerning  the  spiritual  eating  alone :  and  what 
is  more  he  asked  his  apostles,  whether  they  too  would  go 
away,  unless  he  should  remit  something  from  the  severity  of 
the  truth. 

"  Ohj.  Christ  himself  explains  his  promise  as  referring  to 
a  spiritual  eating,  saying,  v.  64,  It  is  the  Spirit  that  qmck- 
neth  :  the  flesh  proflteth  nothing.  The  ivords  that  I  have 
spoken  to  you  are  spirit  and  life. 

"  Ans.  Christ  does  not  correct  their  interpretation  con- 
cerning his   real  presence  in  the  Eucharist,  but  only  the 
34 


402  CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS. 

carnal  mode  of  interpretation,  according  to  that  remark  of 
St.  Aug.  Treatise  27,  upon  John.  *  The  flesh  profiteth  no- 
thing' :  but  how  did  they  interpret  ?  They  understood  such 
as  is  cut  up  in  a  carcase,  or  is  sold  in  the  shambles.  See 
authors  more  at  large."     (No.  21.) 

The  argument  contained  in  this  chapter  is  certainly  con- 
clusive. Of  course  the  disciples  mws^  have  understood  our 
Lord  to  be  speaking  of  the  Eucharist,  although  it  was  an 
institution  of  which  they  had  previously  known  absolutely 
nothing,  and  the  nature  of  which  they  could  not  possibly 
understand,  because  they  were  not  prepared  even  to  receive 
the  doctrine  of  his  death.  The  passage  from  Augustine 
explanatory  of  the  words,  which  at  first  sight  do  seem  to 
favour  the  spiritual  interpretation  somewhat,  gives  the  cotq) 
de  grace  to  the  heretical  argument,  and  decides  this  vexa- 
tious controversy. 

But  the  vindication  is  not  yet  complete,  as  the  following 
remarks  will  show  ;  though  we  do  think  it  is  ungenerous  to 
press  the  point  so  strenuously,  after  the  unanswerable  argu- 
ment already  advanced. 

The  same  doctrine  is  proved  from  the  words  of  the  in- 
stitution. 

"  1.  For  the  words  :  This  is  my  body :  this  is  my  blood  ; 
related  by  the  three  evangelists,  Matthew,  Mark  and  Luke, 
and  by  the  Apostles,  1  Cor.  xi.,  are  most  plain,  and  under- 
stood in  their  proper,  natural  and  obvious  sense,  import  the 
real  presence  of  the  body  and  blood  under  the  forms  of  bread 
and  wine  :  but  the  words  ought  to  be  thus  understood,  and 
not  improperly  and  figuratively. 

"  This  is  proved,  1.  From  the  most  correct  rule  of  inter- 
preting Sacred  Scripture,  which  St.  Aug.  gives,  Bk.  3,  de 
Doct.  Christ,  ch.  10,  to  wit,  that  the  words  of  Scripture  are 
to  be  understood  in  their  proper  and  natural  sense  so  often  as 
they  contain  nothing  which  may  not  be  referred  to  propriety 
of  morals,  or  to  the  truth  of  faith,  or  so  often  as  there  is  no 
obstacle  to  the  contrary  ;  therefore,  &c. 

"  2.  From  the  circumstances,  which  all  conspire  towards  the 
proper  and  natural  sense :  for  Christ  framed  a  testament. 


CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMEN'tS.  403 

instituted  a  sacrament,  sanctioned  a  law  according  to  that 
passage  in  Luke :  Do  this  in  remembrance  of  me  ;  he  deHv- 
ered  a  peculiar  doctrine,  and  addressed  his  friends  when 
death  was  immediately  at  hand :  but  all  these  things  are 
done  usually  by  the  proper,  natural  and  obvious  mode  of 
speech,  not  in  a  metaphorical  or  figurative  style;  there- 
fore, &c. 

*'  3.  These  words  were  spoken  to  those,  to  whom  (as  it  is 
said,  Luke  viii.  10,)  it  is  given  to  know  the  mystery  of  the 
kingdom  of  God,  but  to  the  rest  in  parables:  which  Christ 
was  accustomed  privately  to  explain  to  the  disciples  :  but 
that  this  was  done  in  this  instance  is  no  where  recorded. 

"  4.  The  things  which  the  Apostle  adds  concerning  one 
who  receives  the  sacrament  unworthily,  necessarily  evinces 
more  than  the  figure  of  Christ's  body  and  blood  :  He  shall 
be  guilty  of  the  body  and  blood  of  the  Lord :  also :  He 
who  eats  and  drinks  unworthy,  eats  and  drinks  judgment 
to  himself  not  discerning  the  Lord^s  body. 

"  The  heretics  object  that  in  the  words  of  the  form,  the 
word  is  may  be  taken  improperly  for  signifies  :■  just  in  the 
same  way  as  Luke  viii.  11,  the  seed,  is  the  word  of  God  ; 
John  XV.  1,  I  am  the  true  vine  ;  1  Cor.  x.  4,  But  this  rock 
was  Christ;  Gen.  xli.  26,  The  seven  fat  oxen,  and  the 
seven  full  ears  are  seven  years  of  plenty. 

"  Ans.  It  is  true  that  in  many  passages  of  Scripture,  the 
word  is  may  be  understood  improperly  and  figuratively  :  but 
then  this  is  evidjently  gathered  from  the  circumstance  for 
instance  of  a  dream,  a  parable,  &c. ;  as  may  be  seen  among 
interpreters  and  others  in  respect  to  this  :  but  in  this  case  no 
circumstances  denote  the  same,  but  all  imply  rather  the  con- 
trary, as  is  plain  from  the  remarks  already  made.  Some 
heretics  place  the  metaphor  on  the  words  body  and  blood ; 
but  this  may  easily  be  refuted  from  the  fact  that  the  Apostle, 
1  Cor.  xi.  24,  subjoins  to  those  words :  This  is  my  body : 
which  shall  be  delivered  for  you  ;  and  Matthew  and  Mark 
to  the  words,  This  is  my  blood,  add  :  which  shall  be  shed 
for  many.     (No.  22.) 

**  The  same  doctrine  is  proved  by  tradition.  This  Bel- 
larmine,  amongst  others,  clearly  proves  from  the  testimony 
of  fathers  and  councils,  which  he  deduces  from  the  time  of 
the  apostles,  through  every  age  of  the  Church.     The  same 


404  CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS. 

is  moreover  incontrovertibly  proved,  from  prescription  or 
continual  possession  in  this  way:  it  is  certain  that  in  the 
XI.  cent.,  in  the  time  of  Berengarius,  the  whole  Catholic 
Church  acknowledged  the  real  presence  of  Christ  in  the 
Eucharist :  as  is  plain  from  the  very  confession  of  Beren- 
garius, and  from  his  condemnation :  but  no  time  can  be 
assigned  in  which  this  faith  was  introduced  into  the  Church  ; 
which,  however,  could  be  shown,  if  it  had  not  been  intro- 
duced by  the  apostles  themselves,  and  by  Christ ;  because 
if  introduced  subsequently,  it  must  have  been  done  either 
simultaneously  or  successively :  if  the  former,  (which  is 
altogether  inconceivable),  ^historians  would  at  least  mention 
it  as  extremely  wonderful ;  if  the  latter,  this  could  not  be 
done  without  perturbation  and  contradiction,  which  we 
should  again  know  from  historians ;  therefore  this  is  the 
faith  left  to  the  Church  by  Christ  and  the  apostles,  and 
therefore  true.  By  a  similar  argument,  the  other  truths  of 
the  faith  may  be  demonstrated  against  the  heretics.  The 
Calvinists  object  chiefly  against  this  last,  that  such  a  faith 
might  be  successively  introduced  without  opposition  or  con- 
tradiction, just  as  new  discipline  has  frequently  been  intro- 
duced in  the  Church,  v.  g.  about  the  time  of  breaking  the 
fast,  &c. 

"The  reason  of  faith  is  one  thing,  that  of  discipline  is 
another:  the  one  is  immovable,  but  the  other  is  mutable 
through  change  of  times  and  circumstances.  Besides  new 
discipline  may  be  introduced,  without  the  old  being  con- 
demned;  but  a  new  doctrine  of  faith  implies  the  falsity  of 
the  contrary  opinion.  At  all  events,  the  changes  of  disci- 
pline are  not  so  obscure  but  that  they  have  been  designated 
by  historians;  and  nearly  all  have  occurred  not  univer- 
sally, but  in  certain  places. 

"To  the  arguments  already  mentioned,  must  be  added 
that  God  has  confirmed  the  truth  of  the  real  presence,  by 
open  and  frequent  miracles  performed  at  various  places  and 
times.  These,  the  heretics  indeed  are  in  the  habit  of  vilify- 
ing, but  with  no  greater  right  than  all  credit  may  be  denied 
to  history ;  the  Jews  too  explore  the  miracles  of  Christ,  by 
ascribing  them  to  the  devil,  for  the  most  distinguished  fathers 
mention  them,  as  may  be  seen  in  Bellarmine,  Wiggcrs,  &c. ; 
indeed  from  the  apostle  himself,  1  Cor.  ii.  30,  &c.     It  would 


CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS.  405 

be  too  tedious  to  refute  all  the  things  which  the  heterodox 
have  heaped  together  from  the  holy  fathers ;  however,  for 
the  understanding  of  those  things  which  are  opposed  from 
the  fathers,  it  is  of  assistance  to  note  the  following  rules. 

"  First :  When  some  holy  fathers  call  the  Eucharist,  the 
figure,  image,  type,  sign,  &c.,  of  the  body  of  Christ,  these 
are  understood  in  a  manifold  and  true  sense,  without  detri- 
ment to  the  real  presence:  1.  By  reason  of  the  forms  of 
bread  and  wine,  which  by  the  institution  of  Christ,  are  a 
sign,  figure,  &c.,  of  the  body  of  Christ  not  absent,  but 
present :  2.  Inasmuch  as  the  body  of  Christ,  veiled  under 
the  forms,  is  the  sign  of  himself  existing  in  his  proper  form, 
V.  g.  hanging  on  the  cross,  or  of  his  glorified  body  in  hea- 
ven :  3.  Because  the  Eucharist  is  sometimes  called  the 
sign,  &c.,  of  the  mystical  body,  which  is  the  Church. 

"  Second:  This  sacrament,  as  well  in  scripture  as  in  the 
fathers,  is  often  called  bread:  1.  By  reason  of  the  forms 
which  remain  :  2.  On  account  of  the  matter  converted  into 
the  body  of  Christ,  just  as  the  rod  of  Aaron,  when  turned 
into  a  serpent,  is  still  called  a  rod.  Ex.  vii.  12.  Because  it 
is  the  spiritual  bread  of  the  soul. 

"  Third :  When  some  say  that  in  the  Eucharist  there  is 

■  not  the  same  body,  which  the  Son  of  God  assumed  from  the 

Virgin,  in  which  he  suffered  death,  &c.,  they  only  mean 

that  it  is  not  the  same  body  as  to  condition  and  affections, 

&c.,  although  it  is  the  same  as  to  the  substance. 

^^ Fourth:  When  some  fathers  so  extol  the  spiritual  eating 
that  they  seem  not  to  admit  the  othej ;  they  only  intend  that 
the  external  and  real  does  not  profit  without  the  spiritual. 

"  Fifth  :  If  some  fathers,  who  wrote  before  these  heresies 
arose,  occasionally  spoke  without  sufficient  accuracy,  this 
was  because  they  knew  that  they  were  understood  in  a  good 
sense  by  the  faithful,  who  were  afflicted  with  no  doubt. 
Some  also  spoke  sparingly  and  somewhat  obscurely,  because 
in  the  first  centuries,  the  more  sacred  mysteries  of  religion 
were  hidden  from  Pagans,  Jews  and  Catechumens ;  both 
because  these  were  incompetent  to  understand  those  things, 
and  lest  they  should  deride  and  profane  them.  By  these 
rules,  all  things  which  heretics  propose  from  the  holy  fathers, 
may  be  answered."  (No.  23.) 

"  Objections  from  scripture  and  reason  are  solved. 
'34* 


406  CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS. 

"  OhJ.  1.  Christ  commanded  the  Eucharist  to  be  per- 
formed in  remembrance  of  him  (Luke  xxii.  19.);  but  me- 
mory is  only  concerning  a  thing  that  is  absent,  not  present ; 
therefore,  &c. 

"  Ans.  The  meaning  of  the  words  of  Christ,  is  :  Do  this 
in  remembrance  of  my  suffering  and  death :  as  is  plain 
from  the  apostle,  1  Cor.  xi.  26 ;  but  the  suffering  of  Christ 
neither  then  was,  nor  is  now  present.  Besides  the  minor  is 
false  in  its  generality :  because  the  memory  of  a  present 
thing  is  possible,  especially  if  it  is  not  visible  or  sensible. 

"  Obj.  2.  According  to  various  passages  of  scripture, 
Christ  is  no  longer  in  this  world,  but  has  ascended  into  hea- 
ven, as  Matt.  xxvi.  11 ;  John  xvi.  16  ;  and  Acts  iii.  21. 

"  Ans.  In  these  the  question  is  only  concerning  the  visible 
presence  of  Christ,  but  not  the  invisible  or  sacramental, 
which  he  has  in  the  Eucharist. 

"  Heretics  object  from  reason,  that  our  dogma  is  an  im- 
possible thing,  and  involving  a  contradiction,  because  Christ 
must  be  supposed  to  be  bodily  present  in  many  places  under 
a  little  host. 

"  Ans.  Besides  the  solution  of  such  objections  in  detail, 
(which  see  in  Tournely),  the  general  reply  is  given,  that  the 
prejudice  of  heretics  must  be  corrected  by  showing,  that  the 
understanding  must  be  captive  to  the  obedience  of  faith ; 
for  which  the  following  will  afford  assistance : 

"1.  To  remember  that  it  is  a  mystery  of  faith,  and  faith 
is  the  evidence  of  things  not  seen.  2.  To  allege  that  there 
are  other  mysteries  impervious  to  reason;  as  that  of  the 
most  holy  Trinity,  an3  the  incarnation.  To  reason  from 
the  less  to  the  greater  in  this  way :  there  are  very  many 
things  in  nature  which  are  rather  to  be  admired  than  ex- 
plained ;  therefore  a  fortiori  in  the  mysteries  of  faith.  4. 
To  allege  some  similar  things  :  v.  g.  according  to  theologians, 
the  whole  soul  is  i*n  the  whole  body,  and  the  whole  soul  is 
in  each  part  of  the  body.  Christ  came  forth  from  the  se- 
pulchre and  the  womb  when  closed,  changed  water  into 
wine,  &c.,  which  faith  teaches  and  reason  does  not  explain. 
5.  To  declare  that  the  fathers  of  the  church  have  always 
acknowledged,  that  in  the  Eucharist,  there  are  stupendous 
miracles  and  mysteries  of  inscrutable  truth  ;  and  therefore, 
by  such  arguments  of  the  heretics,  the  truth  of  the  Catholic 


CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS.  407 

doctrine  is  not  impaired,  but  is  on  the  contrary,  confirmed." 
(No.  24.)  In  No.  25,  transubstantiation  is  defined  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  council  of  Trent,  sess.  13.  can.  2.  "That 
wonderful  and  singular  conversion  of  the  whole  substance 
of  the  bread  into  the  body,  and  of  the  whole  substance  of 
the  wine  into  the  blood  of  Christ,  only  the  forms  of  bread 
and  wine  remaining." 

"  This  word  transubstantiation,  although  it  is  not  found 
in  scripture,  is  yet  rightly  consecrated  by  the  church,  and 
employed  to  the  explanation  of  those  truths,  which  are  found 
in  the  scriptures  and  in  tradition,  and  to  the  exclusion  of  the 
heresies  opposed  to  theiiQ ;  just  as  the  church  has  rightly 
adopted  the  names,  consubstantiality,  Trinity,  mother  of 
God,  &c.,  because  what  those  words  signify,  is  truly  de- 
rived from  tradition  and  scripture,  &c." 

"  That  when  the  consecration  has  been  performed,  all  the 
accidents  of  the  bread  and  wine,  (or  their  form)  remain, 
both  faith  and  the  senses  teach :  for  the  same  size,  the  same 
colour,  the  same  taste,  &c.,  remain.  Thus,  however, 
Christ  chose  to  give  his  body  and  his  blood  in  the  Eucha- 
rist, both  with  regard  to  the  rite  and  reverence  of  the  mys- 
tery, and  the  merit  of  faith,  and  to  the  convenient  use  of 
the  sacrament." 

"  St.  Thomas  teaches  *  that  these  accidents  subsist  in 
the  sacrament  without  any  subject,  by  a  divine  virtue.' 
(No.  26.) 

"  How  long  does  Christ  remain  in  this  sacrament  ?" 
Just  so  long  as  the  forms  remain  preserved,  or  so  long  as 
they  are  not  corrupted,  or  until  the  substance  of  the  bread 
and  wine  no  longer  exists.  But  how  long  the  forms  remain 
preserved  in  the  stomach  or  otherwise,  is  uncertain.  "  It  is 
very  probable,  according  to  Pauwels,  that  this  sacrament 
confers  its  effects  not  only  in  eating  and  swallowing,  but 

also    so    LONG  AS    THE    PRESENCE  OF  CHRIST  CONTINUES  IN 

THE  STOMACH :  and  consequently,  that  it  is  highly  praise- 
worthy to  tarry  in  the  temple  at  least  a  quarter  of  an  hour, 
and  to  stir  up  one's  self  in  the  spirit  of  devotion  and  medi- 
tation, that  thus  a  continual  increase  of  grace  may  be  ac- 
quired." 

The  box  in  which  the  hosts  are  kept,  should  be  cleaned 


408  CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS. 

from  time  to  time,  that  the  older  particles  may  not  adhere 
to  the  pixis  and  spoil.     (No.  28.) 

As  it  belongs  to  the  power  of  the  sacerdotal  order  to  con- 
secrate, which  continues  with  a  character  never  to  be  lost ; 
hence  any  priest  consecrates  in  a  valid  manner,  although 
he  may  be  a  wicked  man,  a  heretic,  suspended,  excommu- 
nicated, degraded,  &c. :  but  every  one  who  is  not  a  priest, 
does  not  consecrate  in  a  valid  manner.     (No.  29.) 

The  proper  minister  for  dispensing  the  Eucharist,  is  the 
priest  alone,  "  and  indeed  by  divine  right ;  and  it  is  inferred 
from  these  words  of  Christ :  Do  this,  &c.  That  is,  conse- 
crate, take,  and  distribute  to  others,  as  ye  see  me  do."  The 
extraordinary  minister  is  the  deacon,  with  the  permission, 
however,  of  the  bishop  or  priest ;  but  this  office  is  not  to  be 
entrusted  to  the  sub-deacon,  or  the  other  inferior  clergy,  or 
to  the  laity.     (No.  30.) 

For  the  due  reception  of  the  Eucharist,  baptismal  charac- 
ter and  the  wish  of  receiving  this  sacrament  are  required  ; 
also  a  state  of  grace,  when  it  is  a  sacrament  of  the  living. 
Whoever  is  conscious  of  mortal  sin  is  under  obligation  first 
to  make  confession.  Sufficient  instruction  and  discernment 
are  required,  so  that  the  communicant  may  be  able  to  dis- 
cern this  table  from  a  profane  one,  this  celestial  bread  from 
common.  Also,  a  right  intention,  and  devotion  befitting  this 
sacrament ;  acts  of  faith,  hope,  charity,  humiliation,  and 
contrition.  He  must  come  fasting,  and  with  decent  and 
clean  apparel.  (No.  31.)  In  No.  36,  the  following  grave 
question  is  discussed. 

Whether  the  taking  of  Tobacco  breaks  the  na- 
tural Fast? 

^^  Ans.  1.  If  the  question  is  concerning  snuff,  it  seems 
sufficiently  clear  that  by  it  a  natural  fast  is  not  broken  ;  be- 
cause it  neither  is  food  or  drink,  nor  is  it  taken  as  such  ; 
and  although  it  might  be  supposed  that  casually  some  of  it 
might  be  passed  into  the  stomach,  this  is  supposed  to  be  done 
by  way  of  respiration  or  saliva.  2.  By  smoking,  some  say 
that  the  fast  is  broken,  from  the  circumstance  that  something 
of  the  oil  is  swallowed  with  the  smoke  ;  but  more  hold  the 
contrary  opinion,  because  all  the  smoke  is  usually  admitted 
through  the  mouth  and  nostrils  by  the  smoker  (esjieciaily  if 


CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS.  409 

he  is  expert) ;  and  if  a  small  quantity  is  transmitted,  it  may 
be  as  before.  However,  if  this  takes  place  in  a  great  quan- 
tity, then,  according  to  others,  the  fast  is  broken.  3.  The 
difficulty  as  to  chewing  is  greater ;  however,  Pontas  and 
Billuart  maintain  against  Van  Roy  and  others,  that  by  this 
the  fast  is  not  impaired :  because  it  is  not  designed  to  be 
taken  inwardly :  nor  are  very  many  of  the  more  succulent 
particles  of  the  tobacco  taken  inwardly,  as  chewers  avoid 
this  very  carefully,  on  account  of  the  acrid  and  unpleasant 
taste ;  yet  if  this  latter  should  take  place,  a  natural  fast 
would  be  broken.  Benedict  XIV."  (my  reader  has  not  for- 
gotten the  lucid  dissertation  of  his  Holiness  on  the  chocolate 
question,)  "  thinks  that  the  fast  is  not  broken  by  taking 
snuff,  or  by  smoking,  but  he  determines  nothing  with  respect 
to  chewing.  But  as  it  is  very  indecent  that  any  one  should 
approach  the  sacred  table  with  his  mouth  or  nostrils  smeared 
with  tobacco,  and  redolent  with  its  stench :  therefore,  it  is 
proper  to  abstain  from  its  use,  and  indeed  entirely  from 
smoking  and  chewing."    (No.  36.)    Amen  ! 

In  No.  47,  the  question  is  discussed,  "  When  does  the 
Eucharist  confer  the  increase  of  Grace  ?  At  what  instant 
is  the  grace  conferred?  Steyaert  and  Daelman  reply  that  it 
is  conferred  immediately  from  the  commencement  of  eating; 
Suarez  and  Billuart,  when  the  host  is  passing  down  through 
the  throat ;  but  Gonet,  when  the  forms  first  touch  the 
stomach ;  Sylvius,  however,  replies,  that  no  one  can  know 
this,  save  he  who  effects  it." 

Three  things  hinder  the  effect  of  this  sacrament,  viz. : 
want  of  baptism,  want  of  intention  in  an  adult,  and  mortal 
sin.  (No.  49.)  There  is  a  threefold  mode  of  communing, 
viz. :  merely  sacramentally,  merely  spiritually,  and  sacra- 
mentally  and  spiritually  at  the  same  time.  He  receives  the 
Eucharist  sacramentally,  who,  with  the  intention  of  receiv- 
ing it,  really  takes  it,  but  without  spiritual  profit :  such  a 
case  is,  when  a  person  communes  who  is  conscious  of  mor< 
tal  sin,  &c.  If  a  mouse  or  a  dog  eats  the  sacramental  forms, 
it  does  not  receive  them  sacramentally,  though  the  body  of 
Christ  does  not  cease  to  be  under  those  forms.  They  com- 
mune spiritually,  who,  desiring  it,  eat  that  heavenly  bread 
by  a  living  faith,  which  operates  through  delight,  and  feel  its 
profit  and  advantage.     And  they  commune  sacramentally 


410  CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS. 

and  spiritually  who  receive  the  Eucharist  really  and  worthily, 
and  obtain  its  effects,  as  the  righteous  do.    (No.  50.) 

No.  63  treats  of  the  punishment  for  not  communing  at 
Easter.  A  dispensation  may  be  obtained  on  account  of  in- 
disposition, or  a  peculiar  case  of  conscience ;  but  "  He  who 
without  the  leave  now  mentioned,  or  some  other  legitimate 
excuse,  shall  omit  the  Easter  communion,  &c.,  incurs  the 
punishment  that,  living,  he  be  driven  from  the  threshold  of 
the  church,  and  dying,  be  denied  Christian  burial.  This 
punishment,  according  to  Steyaert,  is  not  the  same  as  ex- 
communication, but  as  it  were  only  a  part  of  it,  as  is  evident 
from  the  other  effects  of  excommunication."   (No.  63.) 

The  65th  No.  treats  of  the  communion  of  the  sick,  and, 
among  the  rest,  the  question  is  asked,  "  What  if  the  sick 
man  vomits  up  the  sacred  host  ?  Ans.  Conformably  to  the 
Roman  Missal,  if  the  forms  appear  whole,  they  may  be  re- 
verently gathered  up,  and  afterwards  taken  ;  but  if  nausea 
forbids  this,  then  they  must  be  carefully  separated  from  the 
filth,  and  thus  they  must  be  laid  aside  in  some  sacred  place, 
and  after  they  have  become  corrupt,  they  may  be  put  away 
into  the  sacristy,  or  some  sacred  sink;  for  so  long  as  they  are 
entire,  they  cannot  be  burned  without  a  kind  of  sacrilege. 
The  same  course  must  be  pursued  if,  by  any  means  what- 
soever, whether  through  negligence  or  for  some  other  cause, 
the  forms  should  be  found  to  be  spoiled."  But  if  the  forms 
have  not  become  corrupt  on  account  of  the  brief  space  that 
has  intervened,  then  the  matter  thus  vomited  may  be  burned, 
and  the  ashes  put  away  into  some  sacred  place,  v.  g.  the 
cemetery. 

^^Wliat  if  the  sick  person  dies  immediately  after  having 
taken  the  viaticum  ? 
Ans.  If  the  sacred  host  does  not  appear  in  his  mouth, 
then  the  dead  man  is  to  be  left  thus,  although  it  may  not  be 
known  whether  he  has  swallowed  it ;  but  if  it  appear  in  his 
mouth,  let  it  be  modestly  extracted,  and  reverently  kept 
until  the  forms  are  corrupted  :  and  then  proceed  as  has  just 
been  said  with  regard  to  the  vomited  host." 

I  have  refrained  from  comments  on  many  of  the  last  chapters,  be- 
cause in  most  instances  tliey  effectually  refute  themselves,  or  are  so 
puerile  as  to  be  beneath  sober  refutation  ;  but  some  of  the  assertions 


CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS.  411 

of  Peter  Dens,  on  the  subject  of  the  Eucharist,  are  so  outrageously 
false,  that  a  few  historical  reminiscences  appear  to  be  a  necessary  ap. 
pendage  to  this  chapter. 

In  the  first  place  then,  in  the  face  of  the  impudent  assertion  of  the 
Romish  theologian,  that  transubstantiation  always  has  been  a  doctrine 
of  the  Church  of  Christ,  we  distinctly  affirm  that  it  never  was  regu- 
larly acknowledged  as  an  article  of  faith,  imposed  as  absolutely  neces- 
sary to  be  believed  by  all  the  faithful,  even  in  the  Church  of  Rome^ 
until  the  Lateran  Council,  held  at  Rome,  A.  D.  1215.  That  the  notion 
had  existed  for  some  centuries  before,  we  admit ;  it  had  either  ori- 
ginated or  been  harboured  in  the  brain  of  a  monk,  at  the  beginning  of 
the  seventh  century,  and  received  some  countenance  from  the  second 
Council  of  Nice,  which  first  sanctioned  the  worship  of  images.  It  was 
afterwards  introduced  into  the  Latin  Church,  towards  the  close  of  the 
ninth  century.  Paschasius  Rathbertus  first  reduced  this  novel  doctrine 
into  something  like  its  present  shape,  and  proposed  it  in  the  Western 
Church,  where  it  was  most  vigorously  opposed  by  Rabanus  Maurus, 
Archbishop  of  Mentz,  who  in  his  Epistle  to  Heribald,  ch.  33,  denounces 
it  as  an  alarming  innovation.  The  contest  in  which  Berengarius  was 
conspicuous,  and  to  which  allusion  is  made  by  the  Romish  theologian, 
occasioned  the  convention  of  two  synods.  For  upwards  of  300  years, 
this  strange  doctrine  was  opposed  by  a  host  of  the  most  learned  and 
pious  men  of  those  times ;  and  as  already  remarked,  was  not  foisted 
by  ecclesiastical  authors  upon  human  credulity,  until  the  4th  Lateran 
Council,  in  1215,  and  then  it  was  effected  in  an  imperious  manner, 
more  by  the  decision  of  Pope  Innocent  III.  ex  cathedra,  than  by  the 
general  concurrence  even  of  that  ignorant  and  besotted  council.  The 
Council  of  Trent,  A.  D.  1545,  gave  it  its  full  and  final  institution,  as 
an  article  of  faith. 

That  this  is  the  true  state  of  the  case,  can  be  abundantly  sustained. 
The  learned  Erasmus  says  in  his  annotations  on  1  Cor.  vii.  "  It  was 
late  ere  the  Church  defined  Transubstantiation."  And  Tonstal  de 
Euch.  Lib.  1.  "  Touching  the  manner  of  the  real  presence  how  it 
might  be,  it  had  perhaps  been  better  to  leave  every  man  that  would  be 
curious  to  his  own  conjecture,  as  before  the  Lateran  Council  it  was 
LEFT  free." 

Scotus,  whom  the  Papists  call  Doctor  SuhtiliSy  for  the  pungency  and 
discrimination  of  his  wit  and  learning,  and  who  lived  about  the  year 
1300,  says,  4th  Bk.  of  Sentences,  Dist.  ii.  2,  3.  "That  which  chiefly 
sways  me,  is,  that  we  must  maintain  touching  the  sacraments,  as  the 
holy  Church  of  Rome  maintains.     But  she  now  holds  that  the  bread 


412  CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS. 

is  transubstantiated  into  the  body,  and  the  wine  into  the  blood :  as 
manifestly  appears  in  the  creed  of  the  Lateran  Council,  under  Inno- 
cent III.,  which  begins  with  these  words  :  We  firmly  believe^  Sfc. 
And  if  you  ask,  why  should  the  Church  make  choice  of  so  difficult  a 
sense  of  this  article,  when  the  words  of  the  Scripture,  this  is  my  body, 
might  be  explained  in  a  sense  more  easy,  and  in  appearance  more 
true  :  I  answer,  the  Scriptures  are  expounded  by  the  same  Spirit  that 
made  them ;  and  so  it  is  to  be  supposed  that  the  Catholic  Church  ex- 
pounded them  by  the  same  Spirit  whereby  she  delivered  the  faith  unto 
us  :  namely,  being  taught  by  the  spirit  of  truth,  and  therefore  she  chose 
this  sense,  because  it  was  true." 

Surely  no  one  will  be  disposed,  after  reading  this  cunning  argument, 
to  question  the  right  of  Scotus  to  the  title  of  Doctor  Subtilis !  How- 
ever, it  is  nothing  new  for  the  most  subtle  Papist  to  beg  the  question  ; 
in  fact  he  can  scarcely  argue  without  doing  it. 

A  singular  statute,  enacted  by  Henry  VIII.,  appeared  in  1540 ;  it 
was  to  this  effect : 

"  That  if  any  person  or  persons,  within  the  king's  dominions,  should 
after  the  12th  day  of  July  next,  by  word,  writing,  imprinting,  cypher- 
ing, or  any  otherwise,  publish,  preach,  teach,  say,  affirm,  declare,  dis- 
pute, argue,  or  hold  any  opinion,  that  in  the  blessed  sacrament  of  the 
Altar,  under  the  form  of  bread  and  wine,  after  the  consecration  thereof, 
there  is  not  present  really,  the  natural  body  and  blood  of  our  Saviour 
Jesus  Christ,  conceived  of  the  Virgin  Mary  :  or  that  after  the  said  con- 
secration, there  remaineth  any  substance  of  the  bread  or  wine,  or  any 
other  substance  than  of  Christ,  God  and  man  :  or  that  in  the  flesh, 
under  the  form  of  bread,  is  not  the  very  blood  of  Christ :  or  that  with 
the  blood  of  Christ,  under  the  form  of  wine,  is  not  the  very  flesh  of 
Christ,  as  well  apart,  as  though  they  were  both  together  :  or  shall  affirm 
the  said  sacrament  to  be  of  other  substance  than  is  above  said :  that 
then  every  such  person  so  offending,  their  aiders,  comforters,  counsel- 
lors, consenters,  and  abettors  therein,  shall  be  deemed  and  adjudged 
heretics,  and  every  such  offence  shall  be  judged  manifest  heresy  :  and 
that  every  such  offender  and  offenders  shall  therefore  have  and  suffer 
judgment,  execution,  pain,  and  pains  of  death,  by  way  of  burning, 
without  any  abjuration,  benefit  of  the  clergy,  or  sanctuary  to  be  al- 
lowed :  and  also  to  forfeit  to  the  king,  his  heirs,  and  successors,  all  his 
or  their  honours,  lands,  tenements,  goods,  chattels,  and  estates  what- 
soever." 

Streams  of  innocent  Protestant  blood  have  flowed,  because  men  were 
not  prepared  to  deny  the  evidence  of  their  own  senses,  of  reason,  and 


CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS.  413 

of  scripture,  by  acknowledging  the  truth  of  the  horrible  doctrine  of  the 
real  presence,  than  which  a  more  daring  and  outrageous  blasphemy 
has  never  been  invented  by  the  Prince  of  hell ! 

The  following  suggestions  may  perhaps  lead  the  mind  of  an  honest 
inquirer,  who  may  be  in  doubt,  to  the  truth. 

1.  We  cannot  admit  the  doctrine  of  transubstantiation  to  be  true, 
because  it  overthrows  the  very  nature  of  a  sacrament,  which  requires 
a  sign,  and  a  thing  signified.  According  to  transubstantiation,  the 
bread  ceases  to  be  a  sign,  because  it  becomes  the  thing  signified,  viz., 
the  body  of  Christ. 

2.  From  I  Cor.  xi.  25,  and  elsewhere,  it  is  manifest  that  the  bread 
and  wine  remain,  such  after  the  consecration. 

3.  To  say  that  the  glorified  body  of  Christ,  which  is  in  heaven,  and 
shall  there  remain  to  the  end  of  time,  is  daily  created  in  ten  thousand 
different  places  upon  earth,  by  the  hocus  pocus  of  a  priest,  is  the  first 
born  of  absurdities. 

4.  If  the  substance  of  the  bread  and  wine  does  not  remain  after  the 
consecration,  then  when  poison  is  mixed  in  the  sacrament,  either  it  is 
mixed  with  the  mere  accidents,  (i.  e.  with  the  taste,  smell,  colour,  &c.) 
or  with  the  body  of  Christ ;  both  of  which  are  absurd.  Now  poison 
has  been  mixed  with  the  consecrated  host,  and  with  the  wine,  and  it 
has  been  but  too  manifest  that  the  substance  of  the  bread  and  wine 
has  been  affected  by  it.  Witness  the  case  of  Pope  Victor  III.,  who 
was  poisoned  by  the  cup,  and  that  of  the  Emperor  Henry  VII.,  who 
died  in  consequence  of  receiving  a  poisoned  host. 

5.  If  the  bread  entirely  loses  its  substance,  then  it  must  cease  to 
exist ;  for  that  which  has  been,  but  has  ceased  to  be,  is  of  course  anni- 
hilated. Hence  it  is  absurd  to  speak  of  the  bread  and  wine  being  con- 
verted into  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ,  for  in  every  change  the  matter 
must  remain,  otherwise  it  becomes  an  exchange,  or  a  substitution, 
or  succession.  And  therefore,  as  the  substance  of  the  forms  does  not 
remain,  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  must  be  substituted,  or  must  suc- 
ceed in  their  place ;  and  hence  it  would  be  far  more  rational  to  speak 
of  day  being  transubstantiated  into  night,  than  to  maintain  the  doctrine 
of  the  Church  of  Rome  even  with  her  own  premises. 

8.  Christ  says.  Do  this  in  remembrance  of  me.  We  remember  the 
absent,  not  the  present.  Christ  instituted  the  Eucharist  as  a  memo- 
rial of  himself  until  he  should  come. 

9.  The  Saviour  says,  John  xii.  26,  Where  I  am,  there  shall  also  my 
servants  be ;  that  is  they  shall  be  with  him  in  his  glory.  Christ  is 
now  Ml  his  glory,  and  therefore  his  saints  and  servants,  who  have  de- 

35 


414  CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENTS. 

parted  this  life,  are  with  him.  Now  when  Christ  is  in  the  sacrament, 
or  rather  when  the  sacrament  becomes  Christ,  is  he  in  his  glory,  or  is 
he  not  ?  If  he  is,  then  the  saints  must  be  there  present  to  see,  and  be 
partakers  of  his  glory.  For  they  are  ever  with  him^  1  Thess.  iv.  17, 
And  follow  the  Lamb  whithersoever  he  goeth,  Rev.  xiv.  4.  But  if 
Christ  be  not  in  his  glory  in  the  Romish  Eucharist,  then  it  is  sacrilege 
to  deprive  him  of  it,  by  thus  crucifying  the  Lord  afresh,  and  putting 

HIM  TO  AN  OPEN  SHAME  ! 


CHAPTER  XXXVIII. 
Treatise  concerning  the  Sacrifice  of  the  Mass. 

PREFACE. 

"  Hitherto  we  have  treated  of  the  Eucharist,  inasmuch  as  it  is  a  sa- 
crament,  or  is  ordained  to  the  sanctification  of  man ;  now  we  must 
discuss  the  subject  in  so  far  as  it  is  a  sacrifice,  or  as  it  relates  to  the 
worship  of  God. 

Canons  of  the  Council  of  Trent  concerning  the  sacrifice  of  the  Mass. 

"  1.  Whoever  shall  say  that  in  the  mass  there  is  not  offered  to  God 
a  true  and  proper  sacrifice,  or  that  Christ's  being  offered  is  nothing 
else  than  his  being  given  to  us  to  be  eaten  ;  let  him  be  accursed ! 

"  2.  Whoever  shall  say  that  by  these  words,  Do  this  in  remembrance 
of  me,  Christ  did  not  appoint  the  apostles  as  priests;  or  that  he  did  not 
ordain,  that  they  and  other  priests  should  offer  his  body  and  blood ;  let 
him  be  accursed ! 

"  3.  Whoever  shall  say  that  tlie  sacrifice  of  the  mass  is  merely  an 
offering  of  praise  and  thanks,  or  a  simple  commemoration  of  the  sacri- 
fice performed  on  the  cross,  and  not  propitiatory ;  or  that  it  is  of  benefit 
only  to  the  recipient ;  and  that  it  ought  not  to  be  offered  for  the  living 
and  the  dead,  for  sins,  penances,  satisfactions,  and  other  necessities ; 
let  him  be  accursed  ! 

"  4.  Whoever  shall  say  that  by  the  mass  the  most  holy  sacrifice  of 
Christ,  finished  upon  the  cross,  is  blasphemed,  or  that  the  mass  is  dero* 
gatory  to  it ;  let  him  be  accursed ! 

**  5.  Whoever  shall  say  that  it  is  an  imposture  to  celebrate  masses 


CONCERNING  THE  MASS.  415 

in  honour  of  the  saints,  and  for  the  purpose  of  obtaining  their  interces- 
sion with  God,  as  the  Church  intends ;  let  him  be  accursed ! 

"  6.  Whoever  shall  say  that  the  canon  of  the  mass  contains  errors, 
and  therefore  ought  to  be  abrogated  ;  let  him  be  accursed ! 

"  7.  Whoever  shall  say  that  the  ceremonies,  robes,  and  external 
signs  which  the  Catholic  Church  uses  in  the  celebration  of  masses  are 
impious  vanities  rather  than  offices  of  piety ;  let  him  be  accursed ! 

"  8.  Whoever  shall  say  that  the  masses,  in  which  the  priest  alone 
communes  sacramentally,  are  unlawful,  and  therefore  should  be  abro- 
gated ;  let  him  be  accursed  ! 

"  9.  Whoever  shall  say  that  the  rite  of  the  Roman  Church,  by  which 
a  part  of  the  canon  and  the  words  of  consecration  are  pronounced  in  a 
low  voice,  ought  to  be  condemned ;  or  that  the  mass  should  be  cele- 
brated only  in  a  vernacular  tongue ;  or  that  water  should  not  be  mixed 
with  the  wine  in  the  cup  that  is  to  be  offered,  because  it  is  contrary  to 
the  institution  of  Christ;  let  him  be  accursed!" 

"  Sacrifice  properly  and  strictly  taken,  for  the  sacrificial 
action  of  which  we  here  treat,  is  thus  defined  :  An  external 
oblation,  by  which  any  sensible  and  permanent  thing  is  coU' 
secrated,  slain,  or  changed  by  a  legitimate  minister,  as  a 
protestation  of  the  dominion  of  the  Supreme  God,  over  all 
created  things,  and  of  our  subjection  to  him,"*"*     (No.  1.) 

"  Sacrifice  is  divided  according  to  the  different  state  of  the 
world,  into  the  sacrifice  of  the  law  of  nature,  of  the  Mosaical 
law,  and  of  the  new  law." 

"  By  reason  of  the  matter,  it  is  divided  into  hosts,  or  vic- 
tims, when  an  animal  was  offered  ;  into  immolations,  when 
the  fruits  of  the  earth  were  offered ;  and  into  libations,  when 
any  liquor  was  offered.  On  account  of  the  form,  or  of  the 
various  action  by  which  the  thing  was  wont  to  be  changed, 
it  is  divided  into  the  holocaust,  in  which  the  thing  offered 
was  burned  entire,  so  that  nothing  of  it  could  be  em- 
ployed for  human  use,  and  it  was  the  most  perfect  sacrifice ; 
into  the  sin-offering,  which  was  partly  burned,  and  went 
partly  to  the  use  of  the  priests,  who  eat  of  it  in  the  court  of 
the  temple  ;  and  the  peace-offeHng,  which  was  offered  either 
for  returning  thanks  for  benefits  received,  or  for  obtaining 
new  ones  :  this  sacrifice  was  divided  into  three  parts,  one  of 
which  was  burned  in  honour  of  God,  another  was  appropri- 
ated to  the  use  of  the  priests,  and  the  third  to  the  use  of  the 
offerers.     On  account  of  its  object,  it  is  divided  into  a  reve^ 


416  CONCERNING  THE  MASS. 

rential,  propitiatory,  or  expiatory,  a  Eucharistical  and  im- 
petratorial  sacrifice.  This  division  differs  but  little  from  the 
preceding.  It  is  called  reverential,  because  it  is  directed 
only  to  the  worship  of  God,  by  solemnly  declaring  his  su- 
premacy and  our  subjection ;  and  this  is  best  done  in  the 
holocaust.  The  propitiatory  is  offered  for  sins  and  for 
averting  the  penalties  and  scourges  of  sins ;  and  is  the  same 
as  the  sin-offering.  The  Eucharistical  is  performed  as  a 
return  of  thanks  for  benefits  received  ;  and  the  impetratorial 
for  benefits  to  be  received :  but  both  in  the  old  law  were 
called  a  peace-offering.  On  account  of  the  time,  it  is  divided 
into  the  perpetual  sacrijice,  which  was  offered  daily  ;  into 
the  sacrifice  of  the  paschal  lamb,  which  was  offered  at 
Easter ;  and  into  sacrifices,  which  were  offered  in  other  so- 
lemnities. By  reason  of  the  mode,  it  is  divided  into  bloody 
and  unbloody.'''* 

"  Observe  that  these  manifold  sacrifices  both  of  the  law 
of  nature  and  of  the  law  of  Moses,  all  prefigured  the  sacri- 
fice of  the  new  law ;  and  therefore  they  cease  under  the  new 
law. 

"  Is  the  sacrijice  of  the  new  law,  single  or  tivofold  ? 

"  Ans.  The  sacrifice  of  the  cross  is  altogether  the  same  as 
to  substance  with  the  sacrifice  of  the  mass ;  because  the 
priest  in  both  instances  is  the  same,  and  the  victim,  Christ 
the  Lord,  is  the  same ;  and  by  thus  regarding  it  the  sacrifice 
of  the  new  law  is  single.  If  the  mode  and  ceremony  of  offer- 
ing be  regarded,  it  is  twofold  :  to  wit,  bloody,  by  which  Christ 
offered  himself  on  the  cross  for  the  salvation  of  all :  and  un- 
bloody, by  which  the  same  Christ,  under  the  forms  of  bread 
and  wine,  is  daily  offered  in  the  mass  in  memory  of  the 
bloody.  Hence  the  Council  of  Trent,  sess.  22,  ch.  2,  Of  the 
Sacrifice  of  the  Mass,  teaches :  '  For  the  victim  is  one  and 
the  same,  the  same  who  then  offered  himself  on  the  cross, 
now  offering  by  the  ministry  of  the  priests,  with  only  a  dif- 
ferent manner  of  offering.'  The  sacrifice  of  the  new  law 
might  be  called  twofold  in  another  sense  ;  the  one  of  redemp- 
tion on  the  cross,  by  which  he  has  merited  for  us  a  full  re- 
mission of  sins  :  the  other  of  religion  in  the  Eucharist,  by 
which  the  same  remission  is  applied  to  us."     (No.  2.) 

"  Formerly  a  twofold  mass  was  distinguished,  the  one  of 
the  catechumens  and  penitents,  whom  the  deacon  dismissed 


CONCERNING  THE  MASS.  417 

after  the  gospel  and  sermon  ;  and  hence  from  the  commence« 
ment  to  the  offertory  it  was  called  the  mass  of  the  catechu- 
mens :  the  other  of  the  faithful,  and  that  lasted  from  the  com- 
mencement to  the  end,  at  which  time  the  deacon  dismissed 
the  people  with  these  words :  Ite  missa  est,  Depart,  the  mass 
is  over:  which  second  dismission  even  now  remains,  and 
therefore  the  sacrifice  which  is  daily  offered  in  the  temples 
by  the  ministry  of  the  priests,  is  called  the  mass.  Further, 
the  mass  is  taken  for  that  whole  sacred  action,  by  which,  in 
the  Catholic  Church,  the  unbloody  sacrifice  of  the  new  law 
is  offered  with  the  various  prayers  and  ceremonies ;  all  these, 
however,  do  not  in  the  same  way  regard  the  sacrifice  of  the 
mass  :  but  some  pertain  to  the  essence  of  the  sacrifice,  others 
to  its  integrity  J  others  to  greater  reverence,  the  explanation 
of  the  mystery,  and  the  edification  of  the  faithful,  as  will 
appear  afterwards." 

"  What  is  the  sacrifice  of  the  mass  1  Ans.  It  is  the  ex- 
tetmal  oblation  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ,  through 
the  forms  of  bread  and  wine,  sensibly  exhibited  by  a  le- 
gitimate minister,  offered  to  God  in  recognition  of  his 
supreme  dominion,  with  the  use  of  certain  prayers  and 
ceremonies,  prescribed  by  the  Church  for  the  better  wor- 
ship of  God  and  edification  of  the  people.  The  Zuinglians 
and  Calvin  ists,  and  as  many  as  deny  the  real  presence  of 
Christ  in  the  Eucharist,  consequently  deny  that  in  the  mass 
there  is  offered  a  true  sacrifice,  properly  so  called.  The 
Lutherans,  although  they  admit  the  real  presence,  yet  also 
reject  the  sacrifice  of  the  mass,  so  that  Luther,  Bk.  con- 
cerning private  mass,  was  not  ashamed  to  write  that  it  had 
been  stiggested  to  him,  and  that  he  had  at  length  been  per- 
suaded by  the  devil,  that  the  sacrifice  of  the  mass  was  to 
be  abrogated.  Therefore  the  innovators  pretend,  that  in  the 
new  law  there  is  only  the  spiritual  sacrifice  of  good  works; 
that  the  mass  or  Eucharist,  is  a  mere  commemoration  of  the 
sacrifice  of  Christ  on  the  cross,  and  that  Christ  has  given 
to  us  a  table  at  which  we  may  feast,  but  not  an  altar  upon 
which  we  may  sacrifice :  against  which  errors,  the  council 
of  Trent,  sess.  22,  can.  1.,  has  decreed  in  these  words : 
'  Whoever  shall  say  that  in  the  mass  there  is  not  offered  to 
God,  a  true  and  proper  sacrifice,  or  that  Christ's  being 
35  * 


418  CONCERNING  THE  MASS. 

offered,  is  nothing  else  than  his  being  given  to  us  to  be 
eaten  :  let  him  be  accursed  !' 

"  Prove  that  in  the  mass  there  is  offered  a  true  sacrifice, 
properly  so  called  ?  Ans.  1.  It  is  proved  from  the  prophecy 
of  Malachi  i.  10.  I  have  no  pleasure  in  you,  saith  the  Lord 
of  hosts;  and  I  will  not  receive  a  gift  of  your  hand.  And 
V.  11 ;  For  from  the  rising  of  the  sun,  even  to  the  going 
down,  my  name  is  great  among  the  Gentiles,  and  in  every 
place  there  is  sacrifce,  and  there  is  offered  to  my  name  a 
clean  oblation,^^  &c. 

"  2.  It  is  proved,  because  Christ,  Ps.  109.,  is  called  a 
priest  for  ever,  after  the  order  of  Melchisedech ;  which 
words  according  to  the  apostle,  Heb.  vii.  8  and  9,  so  apply- 
to  Christ,  that  he  cannot  be  called  a  priest  after  the  order 
of  Aaron :  but  Melchisedech  offered  sacrifice  in  bread  and 
wine,  as  is  plain  from  Gen.  xiv.  18;  therefore  Christ  also, 
who  was  a  priest  according  to  the  ceremony  of  offering  of 
Melchisedech,  ought  to  offer  sacrifice  in  bread  and  wine: 
but  now  unless  he  has  done  this  in  the  Eucharist,  he  has 
nowhere  done  it;  certainly  not  upon  the  cross,  where  he 
offered  his  own  body  and  blood  in  the  proper  forms ;  there- 
fore in  the  last  supper :  and  not  only  there,  but  daily  unto 
this  time,  as  the  principal  minister,  he  offers  himself  by 
the  ministry  of  the  priests,  and  in  this  way  he  has  also  a 
perpetual  priesthood,  ever  living  to  make  intercession  for 
us,  as  the  apostle  says,  Hebrews  vii."  &c. 

"  3.  That  the  Eucharist  is  a  sacrifice  is  proved  from  the 
words  of  the  institution,  related.  Matt.  xxvi.  Mark  xiv.  Luke 
xxii.,  and  1  Cor.  xi.,  from  which  we  thus  argue:  in  order 
that  the  Eucharist  may  be  a  sacrifice  it  is  sufficient  that  in  it 
there  be  an  oblation  with  the  shedding  of  blood  :  but  as  is 
inferred  from  the  passages  cited,  this  predicted  oblation  is 
found  in  the  Eucharist ;  because  the  question  is  concerning 
the  oblation  and  the  effusion,  which  were  done  in  act,  when 
Christ  spoke,  as  the  words  of  the  present  tense  insinuate : 
thus  Luke  xxii.  19,  it  is  said  of  the  body  ;  which  is  given  for 
you :  according  to  the  Apostle,  1  Cor.  xi.  24,  in  the  Greek 
text :  Which  is  broken  for  you :  the  Greek  text  of  the  three 
evangelists  has  concerning  the  blood,  is  shed.  Nor  is  it  any 
objection  that  we  read  in  the  evangelists,  and  in  the  canon 
of  the  mass,  shall  he  shed  in  the  future,  because  both  read- 


CONCERNING  THE  MASS.  419 

ings  are  true,  whether  in  the  present,  is  shedj  that  is,  now  in 
the  supper ;  or  in  the  future,  shall  be  shed,  that  is  a  little 
while  after  on  the  cross,  and  afterwards  to  the  end  of  the 
world  in  a  sacrifice  to  be  celebrated  by  the  priests. 

"  4.  It  is  proved  from  those  passages  of  Scripture  in  which 
the  practice  of  the  sacrifice  of  the  mass  is  implied  :  thus  Acts 
xiii.  2,  As  they  were  ministering  to  the  Lord,  in  Greek, 
Xsi  Tou^yovvTuv  5s  auTwv  tCj  Kup/w,  that  is  as  they  were  offering 
sacrifice ;  and  hence  Erasmus  renders  it,  as  they  were  sacri- 
ficing to  the  Lord.  Likewise  1  Cor.  x.  21,  Ye  cannot  he  par- 
takers of  the  table  of  the  Lord,  and  of  the  table  of  devils  ; 
where  the  Apostle  implies  that  there  is  an  altar  and  a  sacrifice 
of  the  Lord,  just  as  there  was  an  altar  and  sacrifice  of  devils. 

*'  5.  It  is  proved  from  tradition  and  the  perpetual  doctrine 
and  practice  of  the  church,  as  is  plain  from  the  most  ancient 
Liturgies  and  from  the  Holy  Fathers,  who  speaking  of  the 
Eucharist  call  it  a  sacrifice,  a  host,  a  victim,  &c. 

"  6.  It  is  proved  from  the  circumstance  that  the  definition 
of  a  sacrifice  properly  so  called  pertains  to  the  mass  :  for  in 
the  consecration  of  both  .forms  (in  which  alone  the  essence 
of  the  sacrifice  consists)  an  oblation  is  held  at  least  in  the 
act  performed  ;  external  as  it  is  performed  with  words  ;  of 
a  sensible  and  permanent  thing,  viz.,  of  the  body  and  blood 
of  Christ,  through  the  forms  of  sensible  bread  and  wine :  a 
consecration  is  also  afforded  through  the  dedication  to  the 
divine  worship  :  also  a  change  inasmuch  as  by  the  power  of 
the  words  the  blood  is  separated  from  the  body,  and  the  body 
from  the  blood :  a  legitimate  object  is  also  given,  to  wit,  the 
worship  of  God :  for  no  more  honorable  worship  can  be 
exhibited  to  God,  than  that  by  which  the  God-man  is  offered 
to  God,  the  Father :  finally  the  primary  minister,  namely 
Christ ;  and  the  secondary,  the  priest,  concur."     (No.  3.) 

The  host  or  the  thing  offered  in  the  sacrifice  of  the  mass 
IS  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ,  not  indeed  simply,  but 
under  the  forms  of  bread  and  wine :  "  What  is  the  action 
in  the  mass  in  which  the  essence  of  the  sacrifice  consists  7 
It  is  to  be  observed  ;  1.  That  in  the  mass  several  actions  con- 
cur, as  V.  g.  the  elevation  of  the  host,  without  which  the 
sacrifice  subsists  essentially  ;  because  it  imparts  no  change 
except  locally  to  the  host  which  is  still  requisite  for  the 
essence  of  the   sacrifice.)      2.  The  breaking  of  the  host, 


420  CONCERNING  THE  MASS. 

which  does  indeed  change  the  forms,  but  not  the  body  of 
Christ,  &c.  3.  The  communion  of  the  priest  is  not  an  essen- 
tial part  of  the  sacrifice:  the  reason  is,  1.  Because  St.  Tho- 
mas says :  '  This  sacrament  has  the  nature  of  a  sacrifice 
inasmuch  as  it  is  offered,  but  the  nature  of  a  sacrament  in- 
asmuch as  it  is  taken.'  2.  The  talcing  is  a  participation  of  the 
benefit  of  the  sacrifice :  and  therefore  presupposes  a  slain  vic- 
tim through  the  consecration.  3.  It  is  a  settled  point  in  the 
faith  that  Christ  offered  sacrifice  at  the  last  supper;  and  yet  it 
is  not  a  point  of  the  faith  that  Christ  did  take  the  Eucharist : 
which,  however,  according  to  the  faith  ought  to  have  taken 
place,  if  the  eating  of  the  host  by  the  priest  belonged  to  the 
essence  of  the  sacrifice. 

"Notwithstanding,  however,  it  is  rather  probable  that 
Christ  did  take  his  own  body  and  blood  in  the  last  supper : 
because  Christ,  Luke  xxii.  15,  says.  With  desi.re  I  have 
desired  to  eat  this  passover  with  you  before  I  suffer, 
&c.  Besides  if  he  himself  had  not  taken  his  own  body 
and  blood,  there  was  danger,  lest  his  disciples  might  be 
scandalized,"  &c. 

"  Moreover,  the  communion  of  the  priest  is  an  integral 
part  of  the  sacrifice :  because  the  Eucharist  is  not  only 
a  sacrifice,  but  also,  a  sacrament,  and  in  so  far  has  the 
nature  of  food  and  drink,  &c.  And  this  is  the  reason  why  the 
solicitude  of  the  church  is  so  great  that  she  requires  if  the 
priest  overcome  with  sudden  sickness  should  not  be  able  to  take 
both  kinds,  that  another  priest  be  substituted  even  if  he  should 
not  be  fasting,  should  another  not  be  at  hand  to  take  both  forms, 
in  order,  says  St.  Thomas,  that  the  sacrament  may  be  per- 
formed. From  which  it  seems  to  follow,  that  the  communion 
of  the  person  celebrating  is  not  only  of  divine  right  but  also 
pertains  to  the  integrity  of  the  sacrifice.  These  things  being 
premised,  the  opinion  is  the  more  probable  which  teaches  that 
the  essence  of  the  sacrifice  consists  in  the  mere  consecration 
of  both  forms"     (No.  4.) 

"  Next  to  Christ  every  priest  legitimately  ordained  is  the 
true  and  proper  minister  of  this  sacrifice,  because  they  only 
can  perform  this  sacrifice,  who  have  received  supernatural 
power  for  this  purpose:  but  the  priests  alone  have  received 
this  power,  as  is  evident  from  their  consecration.  To  its 
validity  the  wickedness  of  the  priest  is  no  impediment,  if  he 


CONCERNING  THE  MASS.  421 

only  applies  the  proper  matter  and  form  with  the  intention  of 
consecrating :  for  the  power  of  orders  is  indelible  in  him  : 
but  in  order  to  celebrate  it  piously  and  properly,  amongst 
other  things  which  relate  to  the  disposition  of  the  mind,  purity 
of  life,  rectitude  of  intention,  devotion  and  reverence  are  re- 
quired."    (No.  5.) 

The  object  of  the  sacrifice  of  the  mass  is  reverential^  inas- 
much as  it  pertains  to  the  honour  of  God,  and  the  recognition 
of  his  sovereign  power,  and  of  our  subjection,  &c.  It  is 
Eucharisticalf  inasmuch  as  it  is  an  expression  of  thanks  for 
benefits  received  whether  of  natural  or  supernatural  order, 
and  signally  for  our  redemption,  &c.  It  is  propitiatory  ; 
because  according  to  the  Apostle,  Heb.  v.  it  is  the  principal 
duty  of  priests  for  sins :  but  the  Church  certainly  has  her 
own  priests :  therefore  they  are  appointed  to  offer  sacrifices 
for  sins :  now  that  a  sacrifice  is  offered  for  sin  and  that  it  is 
propitiatory  are  synonymous  :  and  hence  the  sacrifice  of  the 
mass  is  offered  in  order  to  obtain  the  remission  of  sins,  to 
appease  an  offended  God,  for  the  remission  of  punishment 
still  due  to  sins,  remitted  as  respects  their  guilt :  and  thus  in 
the  mass  it  is  said  *  For  innumerable  sins  and  offences,'  &c. 

"  It  is  also  impetratorial  :*  because  by  it  we  obtain  both 
spiritual  benefits,  as  it  applies  the  merits  of  the  cross  of 
Christ,  on  which  Christ  has  merited  for  us  every  kind  of 
spiritual  blessings  and  temporal  benefits :  because  these  are 
useful  to  us,  and  may  be  the  means  by  which  we  are 
brought  to  God.  Hence  it  is  offered  for  peace,  for  the  wea- 
ther, for  averting  rain,  &c."  See  canon  3.  of  council  of 
Trent,  at  the  commencement  of  this  chapter.    (No.  6.) 

The  effects  of  the  sacrifice  of  the  mass,  are  said  to  be 
the  following:  1.  The  most  excellent  worship  of  latria ; 
both  on  account  of  the  principal  priest,  who  is  Christ,  and 
on  account  of  the  victim,  which  also  is  Christ.  2.  An  ex- 
pression of  thanks  for  favours  received.  3.  The  mediate 
remission  of  sing,  as  well  mortal  as  venial.  4.  The  paci- 
fying of  the  divine  anger,  &c.  5.  The  remission  of  pun- 
ishment still  due  from  a  sin  remitted  as  to  its  guilt,  and  to 
.  be  expiated  in  this  life  or  in  purgatory,  unless  its  remission 

*  I  claim  the  same  right  to  coin  an  English  word,  that  Peter  Dens 
has  to  make  a  Latin  one ;  impetratorial  for  "  impetratorium  ;"  obtain- 
ing by  entreaty. 


422  CONCERNING  THE  MASS. 

be  obtained  through  this  sacrifice,  indulgences,  &c.  6.  The 
obtaining  of  all  spiritual  and  temporal  blessings,  in  so  far 
as  they  conduce  to  salvation.    (No.  7.) 

The  mass  is  infallibly  efficacious,  in  so  far  as  it  is  an  act 
of  worship  and  eucharistical ;  so  also,  inasmuch  as  it  makes 
satisfaction  for  just  persons,  whether  living  or  dead,  who  are 
obnoxious  to  the  debt  of  temporal  punishments,  which  re- 
mains after  the  penalty  has  been  remitted.  As  for  the  dead, 
it  is  probable  that  God  either  has  regard,  to  the  degree  of 
the  pious  disposition  in  which  they  departed,  or  that  the 
punishments  are  moderated,  according  to  the  secret  judg- 
ments of  his  justice.  It  is  not  to  be  supposed  that  the  rich, 
who  can  have  many  masses  offered  fc>r  them,  will  fare 
better  in  the  other  world  than  the  poor,  for  whom  scarcely 
any  mass  is  offered  ;  because  the  poor  usually  have  less  to 
answer  for  than  the  rich ;  besides,  their  suffering  souls  re- 
ceive benefit  from  the  masses  put  into  the  treasury  of  the 
Church,  according  to  the  rate  of  the  holiness  of  every  man. 

The  remission  of  sins  is  not  infallibly  secured  by  the 
mass,  for  many  persevere  in  sin,  for  whom  the  sacrifice  of 
the  mass  is  frequently  offered,  yet  more  plentiful  actual 
grace  is  infallibly  imparted,  in  order  to  elicit  acts  of  contri- 
tion, unless  some  obstacle  should  be  in  the  way,  such  as  the 
desire  of  actual  sin  might  be. 

*'  Is  the  mass  of  a  bad  priest  worth  less  than  that  of  a 
good  one?''''  In  so  far  as  the  validity  of  the  sacrifice  is 
concerned,  there  can  be  no  difference ;  nor  can  the  mass  of 
a  bad  priest  be  less  profitable  than  that  of  a  good  one,  inas- 
much as  he  is  a  minister  of  the  Church. 

In  so  far  as  the  prayers  which  are  said  in  the  mass,  are 
considered  as  the  work  of  the  priest  himself,  as  a  private 
person,  a  preference  should  be  given  to  the  prayers  of  a  good 
priest.    (No.  8.) 

There  is  a  triple  portion  of  fruits  resulting  from  the  sacri- 
fice of  the  mass  :  general,  special,  and  most  special.  The 
general  portion  is  that  which  falls  to  the  whole  church,  ac- 
cording to  that  passage  of  the  Roman  Missal,  "  But  also  for 
all  believing  Christians,  living  and  dead,"  &c.  "Henno 
teaches  that  a  priest  excluding  even  a  single  member  of  the 
church  in  his  application,  whether  from  hatred  or  from  en- 
mity, or  from  any  other  pretext,  sins  grievously  against 


CONCERNING  THE  MASS.  423 

charity,  and  the  obedience  due  to  Christ  and  the  church." 
The  special  portion  belongs  to  those  for  whom  the  priest  in- 
tends specially  to  sacrifice ;  he  may,  however,  apply  it  to 
himself,  when  he  celebrates  mass  for  no  one :  "  But  this  is 
indeed  very  convenient,"  says  Daelman,  "  that  every  priest 
may  sometimes  apply  to  himself  a  special  portion  of  the 
sacrifice,  as  he  himself  often  needs  it."  The  most  special 
portion  belongs  to  the  priest,  even  when  he  is  celebrating 
for  another,  although  for  pay :  and  indeed,  according  to 
Suarez,  Collet,  Steyaert,  Daelman,  and  Pauwels,  against 
Henno,  this  portion  belongs  properly  to  the  priest  thus  cele- 
brating, so  that  he  cannot  even  relinquish  it  to  the  other 
when  applying  for  it ;  because  the  priest,  according  to  the 
apostle  to  Heb.  vii.  27,  ought  ^^Jirst  to  offer  for  his  own  sins, 
and  then  for  those  of  the  people"   (No.  9.) 

The  special  portion  is  left  to  the  free  application  and 
disposition  of  the  person  celebrating ;  but  if  it  is  not  applied 
to  any  person  either  explicitly  or  implicitly,  it  then  reverts  to 
the  treasury  of  the  church.    (No.  10.) 

A  distinction  is  to  be  made  between  the  value  of  the  mass 
and  its  effect;  its  value  is  infinite,  "considered  as  to  the 
substance  and  sufficiency  of  the  thing  offered,  and  of  the 
principal  offerer,  Christ ;  because  this  sacrifice,  as  to  its  sub- 
stance, is  the  same  with  the  sacrifice  of  the  cross,  whose 
value,  as  to  its  sufficiency,  is  infinite :  therefore,  also  the 
value  of  this  sacrifice.  And  hence,  there  are  no  benefits, 
however  great,  but  may  be  obtained  by  this  sacrifice  ;  nor  so 
many,  but  more  may  be  obtained  ;  nor  for  so  many,  but  that 
it  may  avail  for  more :  and  likewise,  no  punishment  is  so 
great  for  which  it  is  not  sufficient  to  make  satisfaction ;  nei- 
ther in  so  many  subjects,  but  that  it  may  avail  in  more." 
As  to  its  actual  application  and  efficiency,  the  value  of  the 
sacrifice  of  the  mass  is  finite,  both  with  respect  to  its  ability 
to  make  satisfaction,  and  procure  blessings;  this  is  plain 
from  the  practice  of  the  church,  and  the  common  opinion  of 
the  faithful ;  as  in  order  to  obtain  one  and  the  same  thing 
for  one  and  the  same  soul,  the  sacrifice  of  the  mass  may  be 
repeated.  This  limitation  of  the  advantage  "  proceeds  from 
the  disposition  and  devotion  of  him  for  whom  the  sacrifice  is 
offered  ;"  and  according  to  this  opinion,  the  sacrifice  of  the 
mass  offered  for  many  is  just  as  profitable  to  each  individual, 


424  CONCERNING  THE  MASS. 

other  things  being  equal,  as  if  it  were  offered  only  for  one 
because  as  the  value  is  infinite,  and  the  sacrifice  benefits 
every  one  according  to  the  quantity  of  his  own  devotion,  as 
St.  Thomas  leaches,  nothing  is  taken  away  from  the  advan- 
tage due  to  the  devotion  of  him  for  whom  it  is  offered,  by  the 
circumstance  that  it  is  offered  for  others :  for  that  which  is 
infinite  is  inexhaustible."  Yet  it  would  be  wrong  to  receive 
several  payments  for  one  mass.     (No.  11.) 

"  For  whom  may  the  sacrifice  of  the  mass  he  offered  7 
Generally  speaking,  for  the  living  and  the  dead."  Under 
the  former  head  are  included  all  Christ's  faithful,  as  these 
words  of  the  canon  of  the  mass  show :  "  We  offer  to  thee  for 
all  the  orthodox,  and  the  worshippers  of  the  Catholic  and 
apostolic  faith."  For  catechumens  and  unbelievers,  the  mass 
may  not  only  be  offered  indirectly  but  also  directly,  for  the 
good  of  unbelievers  themselves,  whether  temporal  or  spiri- 
tual. It  is  proper  also  to  offer  mass  indirectly  for  baptized 
heretics,  but  whether  it  may  be  done  directly  is  a  controvert- 
ed point ;  and  the  more  probable  opinion  is,  that  baptized 
heretics  are  entirely  excluded  from  all  the  direct  benefits  of 
the  sacrifice  of  the  mass.  (Alas !  Alas !)  Mass  can  not 
and  ought  not  to  be  offered  for  the  lost,  who  are  suffering  in 
hell,  because  it  can  not  help  them,  for  in  hell  there  is  no 
redemption.  The  sacrifice  of  the  mass  is  not  offered  to  the 
Saints,  as  it  is  a  worship  of  latria,  which  is  due  to  God  alone. 
Nor  is  it  offered  for  the  Saints,  because  as  they  enjoy  the 
vision  of  God,  there  is  no  more  guilt  remaining  for  which 
they  must  atone.  It  is  piously  and  usefully  offered  only  for 
the  souls  in  purgatory ;  and  it  is  certain  that  the  sacrifice  of  the 
Mass  is  infallibly  of  advantage  to  them  for  the  remission  of 
the  punishments  remaining  from  guilt,  at  least  as  to  a  part. 
(No.  12.) 

Concerning  the  Payment  of  Masses.  (No.  14.) 
"  It  is  to  be  observed  that  in  the  primitive  church  every 
one  of  the  faithful  as  often  as  they  assembled  for  the  solem- 
nities of  the  mass  offered  according  to  his  own  means  bread 
and  wine,  of  which  a  small  portion  was  consecrated  and  the 
remaining  portion  fell  to  the  priests  and  the  clergy.  After- 
wards the  custom  was  introduced  of  offering  money  at  the 
altar,  in  place  of  bread :  and  to  this  succeeded  the  practice 


CONCERNING  THE  MASS.  425 

of  giving  pay  to  the  priest,  in  order  that  advantage  might  be 
derived  from  the  sacrifice  either  for  themselves  or  for  others. 
It  is  proper  to  receive  pay  for  the  celebration  of  the  mass  ,* 
not  indeed  as  the  price  of  the  mass,  but  on  the  ground  of 
support.  "  The  labourer  is  worthy  of  his  hire,"  and  "  they 
who  serve  at  the  altar,"  &c.  iCor.  ix.  13.  It  is  not  simony 
according  to  Daelman  if  a  priest  refuses  to  offer  mass  unless 
he  is  paid  for  it.  The  amount  of  pay  depends  upon  custom, 
which  will  be  varied  by  time,  place  and  circumstances ;  and 
priests  are  properly  admonished  by  Steyaert,  not  to  ask  more 
than  the  amount  thus  authorized,  as  this  would  be  to  sin  both 
against  the  church  and  against  justice.  Yet  they  may  ac- 
cept more  if  it  is  given  gratis  from  liberality.  It  would  not 
be  proper  for  one,  who  has  received  a  larger  amount  than 
the  ordinary  stipend  for  a  mass,  to  give  the  usual  sum  to 
another  on  condition  of  his  performing  the  sacrifice,  and 
retain  the  balance ;  unless  he  should  be  a  beneficiate,  or 
unless  it  is  done  as  an  act  of  kindness  to  another  because  he 
is  poor,  or  a  relative,  &c. 

"  Marj  a  priest^  who  is  only  obliged  to  celebrate  in  a  cer- 
tain place  for  the  convenience  of  the  people,  ivith  a  free  in- 
tention,  as  they  say,  receive  another  payment  besides  ? 

"  Ans.  Yes :  because  in  such  a  case  the  priest  imposes 
on  himself  two  obligations,  for  which  he  may  receive  distinct 
payments  :  the  one  as  the  price  of  the  extrinsic  labour  by 
which  he  is  bound  to  be  prepared  for  the  celebration  in  such 
an  hour,  in  such  a  place,  &c.  :  the  other  as  support,  which 
he  justly  claims  from  him  who  desires  the  mass."  Whether 
a  priest  omitting  to  celebrate  a  mass  for  which  he  has  been 
paid,  sins  mortally  or  not,  is  not  altogether  settled  as  yet. 
In  case  a  priest  receives  money  for  masses,  and  transfers  the 
obligation  of  saying  them  to  another,  for  merchandize,  v.  g., 
books,  he  does  nothing  wrong,  provided  it  is  morally  certain 
that  the  masses  will  be  duly  celebrated,  that  he  does  not  re- 
ceive more  than  the  pay  he  has  taken,  and  that  the  goods 
are  just  as  acceptable  to  the  buyer  as  the  money.  It  is  also 
perfectly  right  for  a  priest,  who  has  received  a  florin  for  100 
Sacra,  to  say  to  another,  "  help  me  in  reading,  afterwards  I 
will  help  you,"  though  the  latter  has  received  only  8  stivers' 
worth  of  Sacra,  and  the  former  gives  him  nothing  more.  It 
is  not  proper  for  a  priest  to  collect  several  payments  for 
36 


426  CONCERNING  THE  MASS. 

masses,  which  he  foresees  he  will  not  be  able  to  celebrate  for 
a  long  time  to  come ;  and  indeed  he  sins  mortally  who  defers 
the  masses  longer  than  is  just,  and  is  bound  to  make  restitu- 
tion. According  to  some,  one  or  two  months  is  a  moderate 
delay ;  but  this  will  depend  on  circumstances ;  if,  v.  g.,  a 
mass  is  offered  for  a  woman  in  travail,  for  one  in  the  agony 
of  death,  &c.,  it  is  a  mortal  sin  to  defer  it  for  one  day. 
(No.  14.) 

Pastors  or  others  who  have  a  parochial  charge  are  bound, 
by  virtue  of  the  pastoral  office,  to  apply  a  mass  occasionally, 
specially  for  the  benefit  of  their  parishioners,  without  pay. 
(No.  15.) 

As  for  the  time  of  celebrating  mass,  the  rubrics  of  the 
Roman  missal  affirm  that  "  a  private  mass  may  be  said  at 
least  after  the  matin  and  lauds,  at  any  hour  from  daybreak 
to  noon."  And  if  public  exigency  requires,  the  time  may  be 
anticipated,  or  for  the  benefit  of  a  sick  person,  who  would 
otherwise  die  without  the  viaticum,  it  is  proper  to  celebrate 
immediately  after  midnight.  As  to  the  place  in  which  the 
mass  is  to  be  offered,  according  to  common  right,  it  ought  to 
be  in  a  church  consecrated  by  the  bishop,  or  blessed  either 
by  the  same,  or  by  a  priest  by  his  permission,  or  in  an  ora- 
tory, appointed  to  this  use  by  those  who  have  the  authority. 

"  But  there  is  this  difference  between  the  consecration  and 
benediction,  that  the  consecration  by  far  more  laborious,  con- 
cerns the  walls,  which  are  anointed  with  chrism  :  but  the 
benediction  may  be  done  with  holy  water  and  a  few  prayers, 
and  has  respect  to  the  floor  or  pavement  of  the  church." 
The  church  is  violated  by  voluntary  homicide,  or  by  any 
considerable  effusion  of  human  blood.  "  The  church  is  vio- 
lated by  the  voluntary  effusion  humani  seminis."  Whether 
the  effusion  be  according  to  nature  or  against  nature  ;  "  sive 
per  copulam  fornicariam,  sive  conjugalem !"  "  Authors 
commonly  decide  that  the  church  is  not  violated  by  pollution 
which  occurs  in  sleep,  although  it  might  perhaps  have  been 
culpable  in  the  cause."  The  burial  in  the  church  of  an 
excommunicated  person,  particularly  of  one  denounced,  or 
a  notorious  persecutor  of  the  clergy,  also,  of  a  Gentile  or 
infidel,  desecrates  the  church;  so  too,  the  burial  of  an  unbap- 
tized  child.  In  the  same  modes  a  cemetery  that  has  been 
blessed  is  violated  ;  indeed  if  the  cemetery  is  attached  to  the 


CONCERNING  THE  MASS.  427 

church,  the  desecration  of  the  church  violates  it,  but  301  vice 
verscl.  It  will  not  be  lawful  to  bury  in  it  until  it  has  been 
reconciled.  In  order  to  render  an  immediate  reconcilation 
of  a  church  necessary,  the  causes  must  be  public ;  if  they 
are  private,  the  ordinances  may  be  administered  until  a  suit- 
able opportunity  of  effecting  the  reconciliation  is  afforded. 
(No.  16.) 

Certain  things  respecting  the  celebration  of  the 

MASS,  worthy  to  BE  OBSERVED.     (No.  17.) 

"  To  touch  the  sacred  vessels  whilst  they  actually  contain 
the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  the  Lord,  is  by  common  opin- 
ion, not  permitted  to  any  one  under  pain  of  mortal  sin,  ex- 
cepting the  priest  or  deacon.  It  is  permitted  to  the  sub- 
deacons  alone  to  touch  the  empty  vessels ;  it  is  unlawful  for 
others,  except  in  case  of  necessity  or  special  leave;  but 
according  to  common  opinion  only,  under  venial  sin.  The 
case  is  the  same  with  the  purifications  applied  for  cleansing 
the  cup ;  which,  however,  after  they  have  been  washed  by 
the  sub-deacon  with  the  first  ablution,  which  ought  to  be 
cast  into  the  Church  sink,  may  be  touched  and  repaired  by 
the  laity,  and  so  long  as  they  are  not  considerably  broken, 
they  do  not  need  a  fresh  benediction  afler  the  washing. 
When  does  a  cup  lose  its  consecration  ?  When  it  is  so 
broken  that  it  does  not  remain  fit  for  a  convenient  sacred 
use;  V.  g.,  if  the  cup  be  separated  from  the  foot,  (unless  the 
foot  should  be  turned),  or  a  hole  has  been  made  in  the  hot- 
tom  of  the  cup,  or  the  cup  is  otherwise  very  much  broken. 
The  consecration  is  not  lost,  although  the  gilding  of  the  cup 
should  fall  off  a  little.  However,  the  opinion  is  the  more 
common,  that  the  cup  needs  a  new  consecration,  if  the  in- 
ternal surface  of  the  bowl  be  newly  gilded.  Steyaert  says, 
that  the  custom  of  giving  to  boys,  labouring  under  a  cough 
peculiar  and  most  distressing  to  them,  wine  to  drink  out  of 
a  consecrated  cup,  as  a  medicine,  is  not  to  be  accused  of 
any  superstition,  or  any  other  vice.  Is  it  lawful  sometimes 
to  celebrate  without  the  sacred  robes  ?  He  who  celebrates 
without  the  principal  sacred  vestments,  v.  g.  the  albe  or 
stole,  sins  grievously,  even  in  a  case  of  necessity,  v.  g.,  in 
order  that  a  sick  man  may  receive  the  viaticum  ;  so  authors 
generally  decide :  to  celebrate  in  any  urgent  necessity,  with- 


428  CONCERNING  THE  MASS. 

out  some  one  of  the  minor  vestments,  v.  g.,  the  maniple  or 
girdle,  appears  lawful  to  many.  When  the  priest  puts  on 
the  sacred  robes,  he  ought  to  recite  the  prayers  prescribed 
by  the  rubrics,  not,  however,  under  pain  of  mortal  sin,  as 
Neesen  pretends ;  whom  Pauwels  justly  contradicts.  The 
sacred  garments  lose  their  benediction  when  they  no  longer 
retain  the  form  under  which  they  have  been  blessed ;  so 
that  they  now  are  unfit  for  the  functions  of  the  ministry: 
and  thus  the  blessing  of  the  albe  ceases,  if  the  sleeve  is  torn 
off  or  separated  from  it ;  not,  however,  if  the  sleeve  is  fast- 
ened to  the  body  with  cords.  The  blessing  of  the  girdle 
equally  ceases,  if  it  is  so  torn  that  neither  part  which  re- 
mains, is  fit  for  girding ;  not,  however,  if  the  one  part  is 
sufficient  for  girding;  and  then  Collet  says,  for  the  sake  of 
greater  convenience,  the  other  part  may  be  tied  to  it.  Nei- 
ther is  it  sufficient  to  mend  vestments  thus  torn,  that  they 
may  dispense  with  the  blessing,  but  when  mended,  they 
need  a  fresh  benediction.  Sacred  vestments,  so  much  worn 
that  they  can  no  longer  subserve  their  proper  use,  are  not 
according  to  the  canons,  to  be  applied  to  common  purposes ; 
but  others  are  either  to  be  made  out  of  them,  which  may 
subserve  the  use  of  the  Church,  or  they  must  be  burned, 
and  the  ashes  must  be  laid  aside  in  the  sacristy,  or  in  the 
wall,  or  in  the  interstices  of  the  pavements,  that  they  may 
not  be  trampled  upon  by  the  feet  of  those  who  enter.  It  is 
to  be  observed  respecting  all  the  aforesaid  things,  to  wit, 
altars,  vestments,  &c.,  that  it  is  more  probable,  that  they 
are  not  consecrated  or  blessed  by  the  mere  use,  but  only  by 
the  rite  and  ceremonies  prescribed  by  the  Church." 

The  reader  will  observe  that  our  author  has  not  been  quite  so  pre- 
cise in  defining  nice  points,  in  sacred  casuistry,  in  this  instance,  as  in 
most  cases  which  we  have  reviewed  ;  this  is  to  be  regretted,  as  there 
are  several  questions,  which  naturally  suggest  themselves  to  an  inqui- 
sitive mind,  in  connection  with  this  interesting,  intricate,  and  most 
solemn  and  momentous  subject.  It  is  true  we  are  told,  that  if  the 
sleeve  of  the  albe  be  tied  to  the  body  with  cords,  the  blessing  does 
not  forsake  it ;  but  what  if  it  he  fastened  with  pins  ?  And  in  this 
case  must  the  pins  be  blessed  or  consecrated,  before  they  can  he  applied 
to  this  holy  vse  ?  And  if  thus  blessed,  may  they  be  employed  for  pro- 
fane or  common  purposes,  after  the  sleeve  has  been  regularly  stitched 
to  the  albe  with  sacred  thread?     Again  ;  we  arc  satisfied,  if  a  girdle 


CONCERNING  THE  MASS.  429 

has  been  torn,  and  both  pieces  are  like  the  Dutcliman's  rope,  that  they 
may  be  reverently  tied  together,  and  thus  comfort  and  sustain  the 
bowels  of  the  holy  priest,  who  wears  it ;  but  the  question  is,  what  if 
the  one  part,  which  has  been  laid  aside  as  insufficient  to  encircle  the 
loins  of  its  former  owner,  should  be  found  ample  for  a  stomach  of 
smaller  circumference,  may  this  rag  of  a  girdle  in  such  case,  be  used 
as  a  proper  Selt  by  another  ?  And  if  so,  will  it  need  another  benedic 
tion  ?  And  again,  supposing  a  priest  celebrates  mass  in  an  alb, 
which  has  but  one  sleeve,  so  that  the  faithful  are  scandalized  by  the 
apparition  of  one  arm  of  his  sacred  shirt,  or  his  still  more  sacred 
skin,  will  the  sacrament  be  invalidated  by  this  irreverent  display,  and 
by  the  sacrilegious  disregard  of  the  custom  and  ceremony  of  the 
Church  7  These  and  similar  questions,  grievously  torment  our  mind, 
but  being  in  bad  odour  with  the  bishop,  we  apprehend  that  our  per- 
plexity  will  never  be  relieved.     But  to  return : 

It  is  not  in  itself  wrong  to  celebrate  mass  in  a  vernacular 
tongue,  but  the  church  has  forbidden  the  practice  for  the 
sake  of  preserving  uniformity.  In  offering  mass,  it  is  requi- 
site that  there  should  be  a  minister  to  respond  to  the  priest, 
unless  some  urgent  necessity  should  excuse,  such  as  adminis- 
tering the  viaticum  to  a  sick  person.  The  rubrics  require 
that  the  person  officiating  be  in  all  cases,  a  male;  in  case  of 
absolute  necessity  in  some  instances  a  female  may  be  per- 
mitted to  respond.     (No.  17.) 

Concerning  the  precept  of  hearing  Mass.  (No.  18.) 
"  Among  the  five  precepts  of  the  church,  the  second  is 
that  of  hearing  mass  on  Lord's  days  and  other  festival  days, 
expressed  in  these  words :  '  Reverently  hear  the  sacred 
office  of  the  mass  on  festival  days' :  this  office  includes  not 
only  the  essential  or  integral  parts  of  the  sacrifice,  but  the 
whole  liturgy  from  the  beginning  to  the  end.  But  this  is  a 
principle  of  ecclesiastical  law,  founded  however  upon  natu- 
ral and  divine  right.  Who  are  obliged  by  this  precept  ? 
All  the  faithful  of  both  sexes  after  they  have  attained  to  years 
of  discretion,  which  generally  takes  place  about  the  seventh 
year  of  the  age,  and  therefore  children  of  such  an  age  are 
to  be  compelled  to  go  to  the  mass.  How  great  is  the 
obligation  of  this  precept?  It  is  important,  because  it  is 
a  weighty  matter  the  object  is  most  important,  in  order, 
says  Pauwels,  that  the  memory  of  the  passion  and  resur- 
36* 


480  CONCERNINCx  THE  MASS. 

rection  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  in  order  that  God  may 
be  honoured  with  the  sacrifice,  in  as  much  as  the  people 
present  at  the  mass  unite  their  affections  and  devotion  with 
the  priest,  who  is  celebrating.  Hence  the  sin  of  its  omission 
is  from  its  nature  mortal ;  therefore  he  who  with  sufficient 
deliberation  omits  mass  on  a  festival  day,  or  a  considerable 
part  of  the  mass,  sins  mortally.  It  may,  however,  become 
venial,  not  only  from  the  want  of  deliberation  of  the  action, 
v.  g.  if  any  one  out  of  merely  venial  ignorance  of  the  festival 
omits  hearing  mass;  but  also  from  the  smallness  of  the 
matter,  so  that  he  sins  only  venially  who  omits  merely  a 
trifling  part."  The  amount  which  is  to  be  regarded  as  con- 
siderable depends  both  upon  the  quality  and  the  quantity  of 
the  omitted  portion.  Thus  he  sins  mortally,  who  is  absent 
at  the  consecration,  or  who  suffers  his  thoughts  to  be  dis- 
tracted at  the  time,  or  who  is  not  present  at  the  communion, 
because  in  these  the  essence  and  integrity  of  the  sacrifice 
consist.  A  considerable  part  is  detracted  from  the  quantity, 
when  a  large  part  of  the  prayers,  orations  and  ceremonies, 
which  take  place  in  the  performance  of  the  mass  is  lost, 
according  to  some  the  third,  according  to  others  the  fourth 
part  of  the  mass.  If  a  person  who  has  been  present  from 
the  commencement  goes  out  immediately  after  the  commu- 
nion, he  is  by  common  opinion  excusable.  The  dignity  and 
importance  of  the  omitted  portion,  and  the  state  of  the  heart 
are  also  to  be  taken  into  consideration.  The  faithful  are  to 
be  admonished  to  be  present  betimes  at  catechism  and  preach- 
ing from  beginning  to  end.  Several  small  omissions  in  the 
same  mass  coalesce,  and  therefore,  if  in  the  aggregate  they 
constitute  a  considerable  omission,  they  induce  mortal  sin, 
&c:  &c.     (No.  18.) 

Actual  intention,  and  devout  attention  are  required,  in  all 
who  would  hear  mass.  Sacramental  confession  is  strongly 
recommended  as  an  act  preparatory  to  the  mass.    (No.  20.) 

Four  causes  are  usually  assigned  as  affording  sufficient 
excuse  of  absence  from  hearing  mass ;  they  are  inability^ 
charity^  dvty,  and  custom.  Inability  may  be  physical, 
spiritual,  and  moral.  Those  who  are  in  prison,  or  sick  in 
bed,  or  at  sea,  or  living  in  a  heretical  country,  in  which  the 
mass  is  not  celebrated,  are  excused  on  the  score  of  physical 
inability.     So  too,  one  who  omits  the  duty  through  inculpa- 


CONCERNING  THE  MASS.  431 

ble  inadvertence  or  ignorance.  But  the  sick  must  use  the 
necessary  means  for  recovering  strength,  else  they  are  guilty 
of  the  omission  of  the  mass.  If  the  sick  person  has  a  chapel, 
and  can  attend  without  much  inconvenience,  he  ought  to  see 
to  it  that  some  priest  celebrates  mass  there.  Spiritual  ina- 
bility proceeds  from  censure,  by  which  any  one  may  be 
hindered  from  hearing  mass  ;  hence  the  faithful  are  excused 
if  there  is  no  other  priest  at  hand  except  an  interdicted  one, 
or  one  who  has  been  excommunicated  by  name.  Moral  in- 
ability excuses  those,  who  cannot  hear  mass  except  with 
great  danger,  inconvenience,  or  some  considerable  injury, 
either  of  body,  reputation,  or  fortune.  On  this  ground,  the 
sick,  who  are  apprehensive  of  aggravating  their  disease,  or 
of  incurring  a  relapse,  also  they  who  cannot  leave  their  work 
or  flock  on  account  of  danger  of  theft,  or  incursion  of  the 
enemy,  may  be  excused.  So  too  a  respectable  girl,  who  is 
pregnant  from  secret  fornication,  is  excusable.  Difference 
of  sex  and  constitution  is  to  be  regarded,  in  deciding  whether 
the  case  is  really  one  of  moral  inability.  Charity  to  a 
neighbour  excuses  from  attending  mass ;  v.  g.,  waiting  on  a 
sick  person,  by  your  presence  preventing  homicide,  serious 
injury,  grievous  sins  or  quarrels.  Official  Duty  also  ex- 
cuses ;  thus  a  soldier  may  not  leave  his  station,  nor  a  general 
his  army,  in  order  to  hear  mass.  So  also  persons  engaged 
in  glass  or  iron  works,  after  the  furnace  has  been  kindled, 
may  absent  themselves  from  mass,  if  they  cannot  leave  with- 
out serious  inconvenience  or  loss,  and  are  unable  to  procure 
substitutes,  &c.  The  claim  of  custom  obtains  until  their 
purification  in  the  case  of  women  lately  delivered.  Billuart 
observes  that  he  who  in  good  faith  believes  himself  to  be  ex- 
cused from  mass,  although  the  reason  be  not  sufficient,  sins 
only  venially.  The  case  is  the  same  if  the  mass  be  omitted 
contrary  to  intention  through  some  slight  neglect.  Travel- 
lers who  go  from  a  place,  where  there  is  a  festival,  are  bound 
to  hear  mass  before  they  leave ;  not,  however,  if  they  merely 
pass  through  such  a  place.  Yet  they  are  excused,  if  by 
hearing  mass  they  would  lose  the  opportunity  of  going  in  a 
certain  ship,  or  forfeit  the  society  of  a  travelling  companion, 
who  is  indispensable,  because  without  him  they  cannot  find 
the  road,  or  because  robbers  infest  the  country. 


432  CONCERNING  THE  MASS. 

There  is  no  rite  of  which  the  Church  of  Rome  boasts  more  loudly, 
than  the  mass,  and  yet  we  need  not  be  surprised  at  this,  as  she  always 
glories  in  her  shame !  Of  all  the  blasphemous  and  idolatrous  cere- 
monies, which  Satan  has  ever  invented,  the  mass  is  the  most  abomina- 
ble. Such  another  compound  of  silly  trumpery  and  audacious  impiety, 
is  not  to  be  found  on  earth.  The  substance  of  the  following  sketch 
of  the  matter,  form  and  ceremony  of  the  mass,  is  prepared  from  an 
authorized  missal  of  the  Romish  Church,  printed  at  Lyons,  A.  D. 
1520,  from  the  Rationale  of  Durandus,  &c. ;  and  I  give  it  to  my 
reader  with  a  few,  merely  verbal  alterations,  as  I  find  it  in  a  work 
published  in  London,  1735.  First,  the  priest  who  is  to  officiate,  puts 
on  his  head  an  amice,  a  thing,  which  signifies  the  veil  that  the  Jews 
put  on  Christ ;  then  over  the  rest  of  his  clothes  an  alb,  a  white  linen 
garment,  which  betokens  a  garment  of  that  colour,  which  Herod  is 
said  to  have  put  upon  Christ ;  then  he  puts  on  his  girdle,  signifying 
the  cord  with  which  our  Saviour  was  bound  in  the  garden ;  next  he 
puts  a  stole  about  his  neck,  as  an  emblem  of  the  cord  with  which 
Christ  was  led  to  execution ;  and  another  contrivance  called  a  mani- 
pie,  something  like  a  fetter  on  his  left  hand,  in  allusion  to  the  cord 
with  which  Christ  was  bound  to  the  pillar  when  scourged.  Over  all 
this  sacred  apparatus,  a  rich  vestment  variously  figured,  is  thrown. 
Some  have  the  picture  of  God,  or  of  the  Holy  Ghost ;  others,  some 
passage  in  sacred  history,  or  a  cross  curiously  wrought  behind  and 
before ;  and  this  we  are  to  understand,  as  significant  of  the  purple 
garment  with  which  the  Jews  clothed  our  Saviour. 

Thus  accoutred,  cap-a-pie,  forth  comes  his  reverence  with  solemn 
dignity,  and  moves  his  sacred  person  towards  the  altar,  which,  be  it 
remembered,  represents  the  cross,  and  is  covered  with  a  white  cloth, 
denoting  the  linen  that  shrouded  the  body  of  the  Lord.  On  this, 
stands  the  chalice  or  cup,  which  is  a  symbol  of  the  sepulchre 'in 
which  Christ  lay,  whilst  the  Patin  or  plate  that  holds  the  cake  and 
covers  it,  represents  the  stone  which  was  laid  on  his  grave.  On  the 
altar  stands  a  lighted  candle,  emblematical  of  the  light  of  Christ,  and 
of  the  rays  of  his  divinity;  also  a  flagon  of  wine  and  water,  and 
the  cake  made  of  a  wafer.  The  clerk,  or  sometimes  a  boy,  who  re- 
sponds to  the  priest,  is  in  attendance,  bell  in  hand.  The  priest  crosses 
himself  on  the  forehead  and  on  the  breast,  and  after  advancing  to- 
wards the  altar,  retreats  with  three  motions,  significant  of  Christ's 
prostration  in  the  garden.  He  then  begins  the  confitcor,  or  confes- 
sion, which  is  made  to  the  Virgin  Mary  and  other  saints,  desiring 
them  to  pray  for  him.     Whilst  repeating  this,  he  bows  very  low,  in 


CONCERNING  THE  MASS.  433 

order  to  provoke  the  people  to  humility;  though  they  generally  know 
no  more  what  he  says,  than  if  it  were  wild  Irish,  and  many  of  them 
not  near  as  much.  At  the  words,  mea  culpa,  med  culpa,  mea  maximd 
culpa,  he  strikes  himself  violently  on  the  breast,  to  show  that  sin  lies 
in  the  heart.  Then  he  gives  the  absolution  ;  and  coming  close  to  the 
altar,  makes  a  cross  upon  it  and  devoutly  kisses  it.  Then  he  begins 
the  Introit,  or  office  of  the  mass,  commencing,  Command  me,  O  Lord, 
to  speak  well,  «fec.,  which  he  speaks  aloud,  of  course,  in  Latin ;  and 
answers  himself,  "  Dominus  sit  in  corde,"  &c. ;  the  Lord  he  in  my 
heart  and  in  my  mouth,  tScc.  Then  he  says  the  Kyrie  Eleison,  (two 
Greek  words,  signifying.  Lord  have  mercy;  which  are  repeated  nine 
times  in  honour  of  the  Trinity,  three  times  to  each  person.)  Upon 
this,  advancing  to  the  middle  of  the  altar,  and  looking  upon  the  pax, 
the  cross  on  which  the  sacramental  bread  is  hung,  he  makes  a  pro- 
found courtesy,  and  says  the  "  Gloria  in  excelsis ;"  then  wheeling 
round,  he  says,  "  Dominus  vobiscum ;"  the  Lord  he  with  you  ;  and  im- 
mediately returning  to  the  altar,  goes  over  sundry  collects,  the  sub- 
stance of  most  of  which  is,  that  he  desires  to  be  heard  for  the  sake 
of  the  merits  and  intercession  of  certain  saints.  This  part  of  the 
service,  duly  and  reverently  performed,  he  reads  the  epistle,  still  of 
course  in  Latin ;  then  follows  the  gradual,  or  as  it  is  sometimes  called, 
for  brevity's  sake,  the  grail,  and  after  this  the  hallelujah.  Next  come 
the  tract  and  sequence,  a  pair  of  short  prayers,  which  are  soon  mum- 
bled over ;  which  done,  his  Reverence  takes  up  the  mass-book,  goes 
to  the  end  of  the  altar,  uncovers  the  chalice,  and  looking  into  it, 
makes  a  solemn  bow  to  the  pax,  and  then  reads  the  gospel  in  Latin, 
which  being  finished,  the  faithful  cross  their  breasts,  that  the  devil 
may  not  steal  away  the  good  seed  out  of  their  hearts,  although  there  is 
no  doubt  that  they  might  as  well  save  themselves  that  trouble.  After 
this,  the  priest  kisses  the  book,  and  rehearses  the  creed ;  then  turning 
to  the  people  a  second  time,  he  says,  Dominus  vohiscvm,  and  going 
again  to  the  altar,  he  proceeds  with  the  offertory  or  offering,  which  is 
dispatched  by  taking  up  the  chalice,  with  the  wafer  upon  the  cover  of 
it, lifting  up  his  eyes,  and  saying, Suscipe  sancta  Trinitas,  &,c.  "Take, 
O  holy  Trinity,  this  oblation,  which  I,  unworthy  sinner,  offer  in  honour 
of  thee,  of  the  blessed  Virgin  Mary,  and  of  all  thy  saints,  for  the  sal- 
vation  of  the  living,  and  for  the  rest  and  quiet  of  all  the  faithful  that 
are  dead."  Then  setting  down  the  chalice,  he  says,  acceptum  sit,  &c. 
♦'  Let  this  new  sacrifice  be  acceptable  to  Almighty  God."  Then  going 
to  the  other  end  of  the  altar,  he  v/ashes  his  hands,  and  with  a  bow  to 
the  pax,  turning  to  the  altar,  he  makes  a  cross  over  it,  and  kisses  it ; 


434  CONCERNING  THE  MASS. 

upon  this  he  requests  the  prayers  of  the  people,  and  again  facing  the 
altar  with  a  bow,  he  begins  the  secret  prayers  in  behalf  of  the  people ; 
for  which,  however,  they  are  none  the  wiser  nor  better.  These  being 
concluded,  he  bursts  out  into  a  loud  exhortation  to  the  people  to  lift 
up  their  hearts,  be  thankful,  &c.  &c.  Then  he  reads  the  preface,  and 
in  pronouncing  the  sanctus,  "  Holy,  holy,  holy.  Lord  God,"  &c.,  they 
lift  up  their  hands  and  voice,  and  suddenly  the  priest  kisses  the  mass- 
book  again. 

Now  comes  the  Canon  of  the  mass  consisting  of  a  string  of  litanies 
and  prayers ;  here  with  frequent  crossings,  he  prays  for  the  Pope,  &c. 
and  after  this,  the  people  go  to  pray  for  all  whom  they  can  remember 
of  their  friends  and  benefactors,*  desiring  that  for  the  merits  of  such  and 
such  saints,  they  may  be  saved  from  evil.  Then  again  he  crosses  the 
wafer  and  chalice,  standing  with  his  back  to  the  people,  and  takes  up 
the  wafer  in  his  hands,  when  the  boy  rings  the  bell,  which  invites  the 
people  to  look  up,  whilst  the  priest  repeats  the  consecration  in  Latin 
as  follows  :  "  The  day  before  our  Lord  suffered,  he  took  bread  into  his 
holy  and  adorable  hands,  and  lifting  up  his  eyes  to  heaven  to  God, 
and  giving  thanks,  he  blessed,  (here  his  reverence  crosses  and  re-crosses 
the  wafer,)  brake  and  gave  to  his  disciples,  saying.  Take,  eat  ye  all  of 
this,  for  it  is  my  body."  These  last  five  words  are  those  in  which  the 
transubstantiating  virtue  lies.  Then  with  a  world  of  circumstance 
the  priest  lifts  it  over  his  head,  for  the  people  to  see  it;  (this  is  called 
the  elevation  of  the  host;)  and  they  fall  down  on  their  knees  and  wor- 
ship it.  This  done,  he  takes  up  the  cup,  saying :  In  like  manner, 
after  supper,  he  took  this  noble  chalice  into  his  holy  and  adorable  hands, 
and  after  thanks  to  the  Father,  he  blessed,  (here  he  crosses  again,)  and 
gave  it  to  his  disciples,  saying,  Take  ye,  and  drink  you  ai.l  of  this :  for 
this  is  the  cup  of  my  blood,  a  new  and  everlasting  testament,  a  mys- 
tery of  faith,  which  shall  be  shed  for  you  and  for  many,  for  the  remis- 
sion of  sins :  so  oft  as  you  do  this,  you  shall  do  it  in  remembrance 
of  me."  These  words  as  well  as  those  spoken  over  the  bread  are 
uttered  softly  and  with  a  low  voice.  Then  the  priest  holding  up  the 
chalice  in  his  hand,  breathes  upon  the  wine,  and  kneels  down  to  it  and 
the  bread ;  then  rising  up  he  holds  the  cup  over  his  head  that  the 
people  may  likewise  worship  it.  This  ceremony  over,  he  sets  down 
the  chalice  and  covers  it  with  the  cloth,  and  then  kneels  down  again 
before  the  host  and  cup,  and  with  outspread  arms  kisses  the  altar. 
All  this  is  done  with  the  proper  quota  of  crosses  and  bows.  Then 
follows  the  second  memento  or  prayer  for  the  dead ;  after  which  the 
priest  takes  up  the  wafer,  shakes  it  up  and  down  about  the  chalice, 


CONCERNING  THE  MASS.  435 

saying,  per  ipaum^  et  cum  ipso,  et  in  ipso,  takes  up  the  cover  of  the 
chalice,  and  crosses  himself  on  the  breast,  forehead,  and  crown ;  this 
uncovering  of  the  cup  is  to  be  considered  emblematical  of  the  rending 
of  the  veil  of  the  temple  at  the  death  of  Christ ;  he  then  crosses  the 
chalice  three  times  over  the  top  to  typify  the  three  hours  during  which 
Christ  hung  upon  the  cross ;  and  twice  on  the  brim  to  show  the  over- 
flowing of  his  blood,  and  then  by  laying  down  the  host  on  the  altar 
cloth,  he  professes  to  represent  Christ's  being  taken  4own  from  the 
cross.  Then  his  reverence  takes  up  the  host,  which  he  breaks  into 
three  pieces,  two  of  which  he  holds  in  his  hand  over  the  chalice,  and 
the  third  he  puts  into  it ;  (sometimes  however,  this  ceremony  is  omit- 
ted  ;)  upon  this,  the  priest  kneels  down  and  says  the  agnus  to  the 
bread,  which  is  this  prayeT  :  "  O  lamb  of  God,  who  takest  away  the 
sins  of  the  world,  have  mercy  upon  us";  this  must  be  rehearsed  three 
times.  Then  he  takes  the  pax  (i.  e.  kisses  an  image  of  a  crucifix  in 
the  missal,)  and  saying  Peace  he  with  thee,  gives  it  to  the  clerk  or  boy, 
who  carries  it  about  to  the  people  to  kiss.  Meanwhile  the  priest 
drinks  up  the  wine,  and  eats  the  wafer,  and  then  prays :  **Quod  ore 
sumpsimus,  &c.  That  which  we  have  taken  with  our  mouth.  Lord 
grant  that  we  may  receive  with  a  pure  mind,  and. that  it  may  of  a 
temporal  gift  be  made  an  everlasting  remedy,  &c."  By  this  time,  the 
boy  has  come  back  with  the  pax ;  and  his  reverence  holds  out  the  cup 
for  more  wine,  which  he  drinks  off  three  times,  then  wipes  his  mouth, 
goes  to  the  lower  end  of  the  altar,  washes  his  hands,  comes  back  to 
the  altar,  takes  up  the  chalice,  and  does  his  best  to  extract  every  drop, 
that  he  may  with  a  clear  conscience  say  that  he  has  drunk  all  of  it. 
This  done,  he  goes  to  the  upper  end  of  the  altar,  reads  certain  prayers 
and  collects,  and  says  to  the  people  the  third  time.  The  Lord  be  with 
you.  Ite,  missa  est ;  "  Depart,  the  mass  is  over."  Then  he  kneels 
down  at  the  altar,  says  a  prayer  to  the  Virgin  Mary,  and  rising  up, 
repeats  in  his  way  the  beginning  of  St.  John's  gospel,  crossing  himself 
to  admiration ;  lastly,  his  reverence  closes  the  book,  folds  up  the  cor- 
poral,  (or  altar  clotFi,)  shuts  the  chalice,  disrobes  himself  in  due  method, 
puts  out  the  candle,  makes  his  honours,  and  exif ."  This  picture  does  not 
profess  to  present  all  the  sacred  antics  and  gesticulations,  «fcc.,  which 
are  practised  on  such  occasions,  nor  are  they  at  all  times  in  all  places 
exactly  the  same,  but  it  is  believed  that  it  affords  a  fair  representation 
of  the  principal  scenes,  which  may  be  witnessed  at  the  ecclesiastical 
exhibitions,  in  which  the  Romish  priests  are  the  principal  dramatis 
persona.  This  is  a  specimen  of  the  mode  of  worship  practised  in  a 
church  which  claims  to  be  exclusively  the  church  of  Christ;  the  mem 


436  CONCERNING  THE  MASS. 

bers  of  its  communion  are   the  faithful^  the   true   worshippers  who 
worship  the  Father  in  spirit  and  in  truth  ! 

Although  the  absurdity  of  the  mass  is  self-evident,  yet  a  few  sugges- 
tions may  perhaps  not  be  unacceptable  to  the  general  reader.  We  re- 
mark then, 

1 .  This  pretended  sacrifice  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ,  is  con- 
trary to  the  institution  of  Christ.  He  did  not  stand  at  the  altar  to  offer 
himself  a  sacrifice  to  God,  that  the  disciples  might  adore  it,  but  sat  at 
a  common  table  to  set  apart  bread  and  wine  to  sacred  use,  and  to  dis- 
tribute them  to  his  disciples,  that  they  might  take,  eat,  and  drink 
them.  He  says,  2'ake  ye,  eat  ye,  drink  ye ;  he  does  not  say,  "  sacrifice 
my  body  and  blood,"  or  "  make  an  unbloody  oblation  of  me  !" 

2.  It  is  directly  contrary  to  the  positive  injunctions  of  Scripture, 
which  expressly  declare  that  Christ  need  not  offer  himself,  or  be  of 
fered  OFTEN,  but  that  the  offering  he  once  made,  is  sufficient  to  the  end 
of  the  world.  "  Nor  yet  that  he  should  offer  himself  often,  as  the  high- 
priest  entereth  into  the  holy  place  every  year  with  blood  of  others ; 
(for  there  must  he  often  have  suffered  since  the  foundation  of  the 
world  ;)  but  now  once  in  the  end  of  the  world  hath  he  appeared,  to  put 
away  sin,  by  the  sacrifice  of  himself."  (Heb.  ix.  25,  26.)  And  again , 
"  By  the  which  will  we  are  sanctified,  through  the  offering  of  the  body 
of  Jesus  Christ  once  for  all.  And  every  priest  standeth  daily  minister- 
ing, and  offering  oftentimes  the  same  sacrifices,  which  can  never  take 
away  sins :  but  this  man,  after  he  had  offered  one  sacrifice  for  sins,  for 
ever  sat  down  on  the  right  hand  of  God  ;  &c.  For  by  one  offering  he 
hath  perfected  for  ever  them  that  are  sanctified."  (Heb.  x.  10,  11,  12, 
14.)  Therefore  if  Christ  cannot  be  sacrificed  again,  according  to  the 
word  of  God,  it  is  an  insolent  sacrilege  to  speak  of  the  mass  being  a 
propitiatory  sacrifice  for  the  sins  of  the  living  and  the  dead.  This  ar- 
gument Peter  Dens  professes  to  notice  and  to  refute  ;  and  of  course 
adopts  the  favourite  Romish  method  of  distinction.  He  distinguishes 
between  the  one  ohlation  of  Christ  as  of  sufficient  price  to  purchase  the 
redemption  of  the  world,  but  not  as  sufiicient  for  the  application  of  its 
benefits.  But  this  is  a  mere  quibble,  which  does  not  mend  the  matter. 
For  according  to  Peter  Dens,  the  mass  avails  only  for  believers,  but 
if  Paul  is  to  be  believed,  Christ  has  by  this  "  onc  oflfering  for  ever  per- 
fected them  that  are  sanctified,"  and  consequently  they  have  no  need 
of  the  mass,  which  professes  to  be  a  repetition  of  this  sacrifice. 

But  we  are  demurely  told,  Melchisedec  was  a  type  of  Christ ;  and 
the  bread  and  wine  he  brought  forth  to  Abraham,  was  a  real,  proper 
sacrifice.    Hence  when  the  Scripture  says,  in  allusion  to  Christ,  "  thou 


CONCERNING  THE  MASS.  437 

art  a  priest  for  ever,  after  the  order  of  Melchisedec,"  there  is  an  allu- 
sion to  the  mass,  and  a  warrant  for  the  unbloody  sacrifice.  To  this 
we  reply,  that  there  is  neither  truth,  sense,  nor  probability  in  this  ar- 
gument. 

1 .  It  is  not  true  that  the  bread  and  wine,  which  Melchisedec  brought 
forth,  was  a  proper  sacrifice ;  the  Scripture  does  not  call  it  such,  and 
from  its  nature  it  was  incapable  of  being  a  sacrifice,  as  it  had  neither 
life,  nor  blood,  which  every  expiatory  sacrifice  must  have ;  and  tran- 
substantiation  had  not  then  been  thought  of.  Melchisedec  is  called  a 
priest,  from  the  fact  of  his  blessing  Abraham,  which  was  part  of  his 
priestly  office,  and  not  because  he  brought  out  bread  and  wine,  which 
as  an  act  of  beneficence  pertained  rather  to  his  kingly  office.  Besides, 
it  is  said,  "  he  brought  forth  bread  and  wine,"  not  he  sacrificed  them. 
He  simply  entertained  Abraham  and  his  servants. 

2.  If  there  was  any  sacrifice,  to  whom  was  it  made  ?  To  God  ? 
Surely  not ;  for  as  before  remarked,  every  propitiatory  sacrifice  re- 
quired a  living  victim,  and  as  Melchisedec  did  not  transubstantiate  the 
bread  and  wine  into  the  body  and  blood  of  the  Saviour,  this  could  not 
have  been  an  expiatory  offering,  and  therefore  serves  but  badly  as  the 
prototype  of  the  mass.  Did  he  sacrifice  to  Abraham  ?  Was  Abraham 
a  God  ?  Besides,  did  not  Abraham  pay  tithes  to  Melchisedec,  and  thus 
acknowledge  his  inferiority,  according  to  the  apostle's  own  inference  ; 
and  how  then  should  Melchisedec  sacrifice  to  Abraham  ? 

3.  It  is  not  probable ;  for  can  it  for  a  moment  be  imagined,  if  there 
had  been  any  such  mystery  in  this  bread  and  wine  of  Melchisedec, 
that  the  Apostle  Paul,  who  speaks  of  Melchisedec  as  a  type  of  Christ, 
but  for  reasons  very  different  from  those  which  Papists  assign,  would 
say  not  one  word  about  Melchisedec's  sacrifice  ?  Yet  he  neither  men- 
tions that  nor  anything  else  that  could  furnish  so  much  as  an  iota  of 
evidence  to  sustain  the  doctrine  of  the  mass,  or  remotely  insinuate  that 
the  bread  and  wine  had  any  allusion  to  the  unbloody  sacrifice  of  the 
Roman  Church. 

Another  passage  which  Peter  Dens  cites  in  favour  of  the  mass,  is 
Mai.  i.  11.  "  From,  the  rising  of  the  sun  to  the  going  down  of  the  same^ 
my  name  shall  be  great  among  the  Gentiles,  and  in  every  place  a  sa- 
crifice shall  be  offered  in  my  name  for  a  pure  offering."  Now  as  this 
prophecy  relates  to  Gospel  times,  of  course  there  must  be  some  sacri- 
fice in  the  Christian  Church,  that  may  be  offered  up  in  every  place, 
and  what  can  this  be  but  the  mass  ?  Sure  enough !  To  this  we 
answer  ;  the  reading  of  this  text  is  bad,  but  the  interpretation  is  worse : 
the  word,  which  in  the  Doway  is  translated  sacrifice,  properly  signifies 
37 


438  CONCERNING  PENANCE. 

incense,  or  any  spiritual  oblation,  and  so  it  is  rendered  in  the  Holy 
Bible.  Now  both  sacrifice  and  incense  are  figuratively  used  in  the 
word  of  God  to  denote  a  purely  spiritual  oblation.  "  Let  my  prayer  be 
set  forth  before  thee  as  incense,  and  the  lifting  up  of  mine  hands,  as 
the  evening  sacrifice  ;"  the  Psalmist  (Ps.  cxli.  2.)  here  speaks  of  the 
incense  and  sacrifice  of  prayer ;  why,  therefore,  must  the  word  here 
be  understood  as  alluding  to  a  proper  expiatory  sacrifice  ?  In  Rev. 
V.  8.  we  read ;  "  the  four-and-twenty  elders  fell  down  before  the  Lamb 
having  every  one  of  them  harps,  and  golden  vials  full  of  odours, 
which  are  the  prayers  of  the  saints."  By  odours  we  are  to  understand 
incense,  which  is  a  sweet  perfume,  and  signifies  that  the  prayers  of 
the  saints  are  sweet  and  acceptable  to  God.  But  wherever  Christ  has 
a  church,  "  from  the  rising  of  the  sun  to  the  going  down  thereof," 
there  the  "pure  ofiering,"  and  the  " incense"  of  prayer  ascend  to  the 
mercy  seat ;  so  that  this  prophecy  is  literally  fulfilled,  even  though  we 
repudiate  the  mass,  as  an  unbloody  abomination  ! 


CHAPTER  XXXIX. 

Treatise   concerning  the   Sacrament  of  Penance. 

Approbation. 

"Many  truly  excellent  theologians  have  hitherto  thoroughly  dis- 
cussed  the  matter  of  the  Sacrament  of  Penance,  according  to  rule ;  so 
that  it  might  appear  superfluous  to  submit  it  again  to  the  press.  They 
have  indeed  proposed  principles  and  foundations ;  but  (saving  their 
peace  be  it  spoken,)  the  most  of  them  have  insisted  on  speculation 
rather  than  on  practice.  The  venerable  and  most  learned  D.  Arch- 
presbyter,  President  of  the  Archepiscopal  Seminary,"  (Peter  Dens,) 
"  being  especially  solicitous  to  train  for  pastoral  duties,  the  theologians 
committed  to  his  care,  insists  upon  practice  more  than  speculation. 
And  therefore  retrenching  very  many  questions  of  little  utility,  he 
teaches  the  way  by  which  his  pupils  may  be  able  to  lead  to  true  peni- 
tence. Turning  neither  to  the  right  hand  nor  to  the  left,  and  hence 
avoiding  on  the  one  hand,  the  rocks  of  Scylla,  of  too  great  severity,  and 
on  the  other,  the  Charybdis  of  undue  indulgence,  he  pursues  the  middle 
way,  or  the  safe  path  of  salvation,  and  insists  steadfastly  upon  the 


CONCERNING  PENANCE.  439 

doctrine  of  holy  mother  Church,  and  the  decrees  of  the  apostolic  See  ; 
and  according  to  his  own  and  my  judgmenrt,  whatever  he  has  written 
or  said,  he  submits  entirely  to  the  censorship  of  the  supreme  Vicars, 
of  the  same  holy  Mother,  and  of  Christ.  In  reliance,  therefore,  upon 
these  foundations,  I  think  without  hesitation,  that  this  treatise  on  pen- 
ance, and  the  other  connected  topics,  will  be  worthy  of  the  public 
light,  and  profitable  to  the  readers.     Mechlin,  September  18th,  1758. 

"J.    F.    FOPPENS, 

"S.  T.  L.  Metropol.  Mechl.  Eccl.  Canon.  Grad.  et  Archidiac. 
Libr.  Censor." 

PREFACE. 

Decree   of  the  Council   of  Florence,  for  the  in- 
struction OF  THE  Armenians. 

**  The  fourth  sacrament  is  penance,  of  which  the  acts  of  the  peni- 
tent are,  as  it  were,  the  matter,  and  these  are  distinguished  into  three 
parts ;  of  which  the  first  is,  contrition  of  heart;  to  which  pertains,  that 
he  be  sorry  for  the  sin  committed,  with  the  purpose  of  not  sinning  in 
future.  The  second  is,  the  confession  of  the  mouth ;  to  which  per- 
tains, that  the  sinner  confess  entirely  to  his  priest,  all  the  sins  of  which 
he  has  any  recollection.  The  third  is,  satisfaction  for  the  sins  accord- 
ing to  the  judgment  of  the  priest ;  which,  indeed,  is  made  principally 
through  prayer,  fasting,  and  alms-giving.  The  words  of  absolution, 
which  the  priest  pronounces,  when  he  says,  /  absolve  thee^  &c.,  are 
the  form  of  this  sacrament.  The  minister  of  this  sacrament,  is  the 
priest  having  either  the  ordinary  authority  of  absolving,  or  by  the 
commission  of  a  superior.  The  eflect  of  this  sacrament  is  absolution 
from  sins." 

Canons  of  the  Council  of  Trent,  concerning  Penance. 

"  1.  Whoever  shall  say  that  penance  in  the  Catholic  Church,  is  not 
truly  and  properly  a  sacrament  for  the  reconciliation  of  the  faithful 
to  God,  as  oflen  as  they  fall  into  sins  afler  baptism,  instituted  by  Christ 
our  Lord ;  let  him  be  accursed  ! 

"2.  Whoever  confounding  the  sacraments,  shall  say,  that  baptism 
itself  is  the  sacrament  of  penance,  .as  if  these  two  sacraments  were 
not  distinct,  and  that,  therefore,  penance  is  not  rightly  termed,  a  second 
plank  after  shipwreck  ;  let  him  be  accursed ! 

"  3.  Whoever  shall  say,  that  those  words  of  the  Lord  and  Saviour : 
Receive  the  Holy  Ghost ;  whose  sins  you  shall  forgive,  they  are  for- 
given  them,  and  whose  sins  ye  shall  retain,  they  are  retained :  are  not 
to  be  understood  of  the  power  of  remitting  and  retaining  sins  in  tb» 


440  CONCERNING  PENANCE. 

sacrament  of  penance,  as  the  Catholic  Church  has  always  understood, 
from  the  beginning :  but  slmll  falsely  apply  them  against  the  institu- 
tion of  this  sacrament,  to  the  authority  of  preaching  the  gospel ;  let 
him  be  accursed  I 

"  4.  Whoever  shall  deny,  that  three  acts  are  required  in  the  penitent 
for  the  entire  and  perfect  remission  of  sins,  constituting,  as  it  were,  the 
matter  of  the  sacrament  of  penance,  viz :  contrition,  confession,  and 
satisfaction,  which  are  called  the  three  parts  of  penance ;  or  shall  say, 
that  only  two  are  parts  of  penance,  to  wit :  the  terrors  by  which  the 
conscience  is  smitten  by  the  sense  of  sin,  and  faith,  produced  by  the 
gospel,  or  by  absolution,  whereby  the  person  believes  that  his  sins 
have  been  remitted  to  him  by  Christ ;  let  him  be  accursed  ! 

"  5.  Whoever  shall  affirm,  that  the  contrition,  which  is  produced  by 
examination,  enumeration,  and  detestation  of  isins,  by  which  any  one 
recounts  his  years  in  the  bitterness  of  his  soul,  pondering  the  weight, 
multitude,  and  baseness  of  his  offences,  the  loss  of  eternal  happiness, 
and  the  desert  of  eternal  damnation,  with  a  resolution  of  leading  a 
better  life,  is  not  true  and  profitable  sorrow,  and  does  not  prepare  for 
grace,  but  makes  a  man  a  hypocrite  and  a  greater  sinner,  and  that  it 
is  only  a  forced  sorrow,  and  not  free  and  voluntary ;  let  him  be 
accursed ! 

*'  6.  Whoever  shall  deny  that  sacramental  confession  has  either  been 
instituted  by  divine  command,  or  is  necessary  to  salvation ;  or  shall 
say  that  the  mode  of  secretly  confessing  to  a  priest  alone,  which  the 
Catholic  Church  always  has  observed  from  the  beginning,  and  still 
observes,  is  foreign  from  the  institution  and  command  of  Christ,  and 
is  a  human  invention ;  let  him  be  accursed ! 

"  7.  Whoever  shall  affirm,  that  in  the  sacrament  of  penance,  it  is 
not  necessary  by  divine  command,  for  the  remission  of  sins,  to  confess 
all  and  every  mortal  sin,  of  which  recollection  may  be  had,  with  due 
and  diligent  premeditation,  including  secret  offences,  and  those  which 
are  against  the  two  last  precepts  of  the  decalogue,  and  the  circum- 
stances which  change  the  species  of  sin :  but  that  this  confession  is 
useful  only  for  the  instruction  and  consolation  of  the  penitent,  and 
was  anciently  observed,  only  as  a  oanonical  satisfaction  imposed  upon 
him :  or  shall  say,  that  they  who  endeavour  to  confess  all  their  sins, 
wish  to  leave  nothing  for  the  divine  mercy  to  pardon  ;  or  finally,  that 
it  is  not  proper  to  confess  venial  sins ;  let  him  be  accursed ! 

"  8.  Whoever  shall  say,  that  the  confession  of  all  sins,  such  as  the 
Church  observes,  is  impossible,  and  that  it  is  a  human  tradition,  to  be 
abolished  by  the  pious ;  or  that  all  and  every  one  of  Christ's  faithful, 


CONCERNING  PENANCE.  441 

of  both  sexes,  are  not  bound  to  observe  it  once  in  the  year,  according 
to  the  constitution  of  the  great  Lateran  council,  and  that  for  this  rea- 
son, Christ's  faithful  should  be  advised  not  to  confess  in  the  time  of 
Lent ;  let  him  be  accursed  ! 

••9.  Whoever  shall  say,  that  the  sacramental  absolution  of  the  priest 
is  not  a  judicial  act,  but  a  mere  ministry  to  pronounce  and  declare, 
that  sins  are  remitted  to  the  person  making  confession,  provided  that 
he  only  believes  that  he  is  absolved,  even  though  the  priest  should  not 
absolve  seriously,  but  in  joke ;  or  shall  say,  that  the  confession  of  a 
penitent  is  not  requisite,  in  order  that  the  priest  may  absolve  hita;  let 
him  be  accursed ! 

"  10.  Whoever  shall  say,  that  priests  who  are  living  in  mortal  sin 
do  not  possess  the  pov<rer  of  binding  and  loosing ;  or  that  the  priests 
are  not  the  only  ministers  of  absolution,  but  that  it  was  said  to  all  and 
every  one  of  Christ's  faithful :  Whatsoever  you  shall  bind  upon  earthy 
shall  be  bound  also  in  heaven ;  and  whatsoever  you  shall  loose  upon 
earth,  shall  be  loosed  also  in  heaven ;  and  whose  sins  you  shall  forgive^ 
they  are  forgiven,  and  whose  sins  you  shall  retain,  they  are  retained: 
by  virtue  of  which  words,  any  one  may  forgive  sin ;  public  sins,  by 
reproof  only,  if  the  offender  shall  acquiesce ;  and  private  sins,  by  vol- 
untary confession ;  let  him  be  accursed ! 

"  11.  Whoever  shall  say  that  bishops  have  not  the  right  of  reserving 
cases  to  themselves,  except  such  as  relate  to  the  external  polity  of  the 
Church,  and  therefore  that  the  reservation  of  cases  does  not  hinder  the 
priest  from  truly  absolving  from  reserved  cases ;  let  him  be  accursed ! 

"  12.  Whoever  shall  say  that  the  whole  penalty,  together  with  the 
guilt,  is  always  remitted  by  God,  and  that  the  satisfaction  of  penitents 
is  nothing  else  than  the  faith  by  which  they  apprehend  that  Christ  has 
satisfied  for  them ;  let  him  be  arccursed  ! 

"  13.  Whoever  shall  say  that  satisfaction  is  by  no  means  made  to 
God,  through  Christ's  merits,  for  sins  as  to  their  temporal  penalty,  by 
punishments  inflicted  by  him,  and  patiently  borne,  or  enjoined  by  the 
priests,  though  not  undergone  voluntarily,  as  fastings,  prayers,  alms, 
or  also  other  works  of  piety,  and  therefore  that  the  best  penance  is  no- 
thing more  than  a  new  life ;  let  him  be  accursed  ! 

"  14.  Whoever  shall  say  that  the  satisfactions  by  which  penitents 
redeem  themselves  from  sin  through  Jesus  Christ,  are  no  part  of  the 
service  of  God,  but  traditions  of  men,  obscuring  the  doctrine  concern- 
ing grace,  and  the  true  worship  of  God,  and  the  actual  benefit  of 
Christ's  death  ;  let  him  be  accursed  ! 

"  15.  Whoever  shall  say  that  the  keys  of  the  Church  were  given 
37* 


442  CONCERNING  PENANCE. 

only  for  loosing,  not  also  for  binding,  and  that  therefore,  the  priests 
when  they  impose  punishments  upon  those  who  confess,  act  against 
the  design  of  the  keys,  and  contrary  to  the  institution  of  Christ ;  and 
that  it  is  a  fiction,  that  when  by  virtue  of  the  keys  the  eternal  penalty 
has  been  removed,  the  temporal  punishment  may  still  often  remain  to 
be  suJSered ;  let  him  be  accursed  !" 

Penance  is  defined  as  "  a  sacrament  of  the  new  law,  by 
which  absolution  of  sins  is  given  by  a  priest  having  Juris- 
diction, to  baptized  persons  who  have  relapsed,  are  contrite, 
and  have  made  confessionJ^  This  sacrament  is  known  by 
various  names ;  the  Council  of  Trent  terms  it,  the  second 
plank  after  shipwreck;  and  it  is  also  commonly  called  con- 
fession, from  its  material  part.     (No.  1.) 

It  is  PROVED  to  be  a  sacrament,  1.  From  the  Councils  of 
Florence  and  of  Trent,  by  which  an  anathema  is  inflicted  on 
all  who  deny  that  penance  is  a  sacrament.  And  2.  From 
the  words  of  Christ ;  Receive  the  Holy  Ghost ;  whose  sins 
you  shall  forgive  they  are  forgiven  to  them,  and  whose  ye 
retain  they  are  retained.  John  xx.  22.  In  which  words 
Christ  designated  all  things  that  are  essential  for  the  sacra- 
ment of  penance ;  he  designated  the  minister,  when  he  con- 
ceded this  power  to  the  apostles  only,  whom  he  addressed  ; 
the  ybrm  of  the  sacrament  is  indicated  in  the  words,  you 
shall  forgive,  by  which  is  intimated  that  the  remission 
should  be  effected  by  the  words  of  the  priest ;  the  remote 
matter  is  expressed  by  the  word,  sins;  contrition,  or  the  dis- 
position is  insinuated  by  the  fact  that  the  sins  of  some  peni- 
tents are  to  be  forgiven,  but  of  others  to  be  retained  ;  lastly, 
the  confession  of  every  sin  in  particular  is  taught  by  this, 
that  the  priests  are  there  constituted  judges  ;  for  it  is  entrusted 
to  their  judgment  to  remit  or  retain  all  sins ;  but  now  no  one 
can  be  a  judge  in  a  case  that  is  unknown  to  him  ;  therefore 
he  ought  to  know  the  offences ;  but  he  cannot  become 
acquainted  with  them  except  through  the  sinner's  own  con- 
fession ;  because  the  sinner  alone  knows  the  offences,  inas- 
much as  they  are  in  his  conscience  ;  therefore  his  confession 
is  requisite  in  order  that  the  confessor  may  judge  of  the  of- 
fences as  they  are  in  the  sinner's  conscience.  To  the 
objection  that  God  alone  can  forgive  sins,  the  reply  is  made 
that  God  alone  can  remit  principally,  and  by  his  own  au- 
thority ;  but  the  priests  forgive  ministerially.     (No.  2.) 


CONCERNING  PENANCE.  443 

This  sacrament  was  instituted  on  the  very  day  of  the  re- 
surrection.    (No.  3.) 

The  proximate  matter  of  the  penitent,  consists  of  the  three 
acts  of  contrition,  confession  and  satisfaction.  The  remote 
matter  comprises  any  sins  whatever,  committed  after  bap- 
tism.    (No.  5.) 

The  remote  matter  is  divided  into  necessary ^  and  optional, 
or  sufficient.  The  necessary  remote  matter  consists  of  all 
mortal  sins,  and  the  optional,  (so  called  because  it  is  left  to- 
the  choice  of  the  penitent,  whether  he  will  express  them  or 
not  in  confession,)  includes  all  venial  offences.  (Nos.  6  and  7.) 

It  is  considered  beneficial  to  confess  these  also.     (No.  9.) 

The  form  is,  /  absolve  thee  from  thy  sins,  in  the  name 
of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 
The  essential  words  are,  I  absolve  thee.     (No.  13.) 

"  The  sense  is  this  :  I  judicially  confer  upon  thee  the  grace 
of  the  remission  of  thy  sins,  or  grace  in  itself  procuring  the 
remission  of  thy  sins,. in  so  far  as  respects  my  ministry. 
This  sense  of  the  form  cannot  be  admitted  :  I  declare  thee 
absolved  ;  because  it  was  condemned  by  Council  of  Trent." 
(No.  14.) 

It  is  proper  to  use  "  these  and  similar  conditions,  as  the 
case  may  require ;  If  thou  art  alive,  if  thou  art  baptized, 
if  thou  hast  sinned,  if  thou  art  capable  of  the  use  of  reason  ; 
Daelman  adds.  If  thou  art  a  Catholic :  but  it  is  enough  to 
understand  these  internally  and  intentionally."     (No.  16.) 

This  sacrament  is  necessary  in  fact  or  in  desire,  as  a 
means  to  justification  and  salvation  for  those  who  have  re- 
lapsed into  mortal  sin,  after  baptism.     (No.  21.) 

Penance  may  be  repeated  till  seventy  times  seven,  that  is, 
as  often  as  the  sinner  sins  and  repents.    (No.  22.) 

Public  penances,  which  were  formerly  customary,  were 
distinguished  as  ceremonial  and  not  ceremonial ;  the  latter 
were  frequently  repeated,  but  the  former  was  performed  only 
once  in  a  lifetime.     (No.  23.) 

The  ceremonies  which  are  observed  at  the  sacrament  of 
penance,  are  as  follows ;  "  First,  the  confessor  in  imparting 
his  blessing  to  the  kneeling  penitent,  says :  The  Lord  be  in 
thy  heart,  and  in  thy  lips,  that  thou  may  est  worthily  con- 
fess thy  sins  :  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son, 
and  of  the  Holy  Ghost.     Presently  the  confessor  may  in- 


444  CONCERNING  PENANCE. 

quire,  how  long  it  is  since  he  has  confessed,  &c.  Having 
heard  the  confession,  and  the  necessary  questions  and  exami- 
nation being  finished,  the  confessor  will  endeavour  to  ex- 
cite the  penitent  to  true  sorrow  of  contrition,  above  all 
from  the  motive  of  the  love  of  God.  Thus  the  pastorale. 
Lastly,  he  will  enjoin  salutary  and  convenient  satisfaction. 

"  Afterwards  let  the  priest  say :  May  Almighty  God 
have  mercy  on  thee,  and  having  remitted  thy  sins,  lead  thee 
through  to  eternal  life.  Amen.  Then,  having  raised  his 
right  hand  towards  the  penitent,  let  him  say:  May  the 
Almighty  and  merciful  Lord  give  to  thee  the  indulgence, 
absolution,  and  remission  of  thy  sins.  Amen.  May  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  absolve  thee  :  Thus  far  the  prayers  and 
invocations  are  preparatory  :  the  absolution  from  censures 
follows  :  And  I,  by  his  authority,  loose  thee  from  every  bond 
of  excommunication,  suspension,  and  interdict,  in  so  far  as 
I  am  able  and  thou  hast  need.  If  the  penitent  is  a  layman, 
the  word,  suspension,  is  omitted.  Then  follows  the  sacra- 
mental absolution,  or  the  form  of  the  sacrament :  I  absolve 
thee  from  thy  sins,  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the 
Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  Amen.  The  confessor  subjoins 
the  following  prayer.  May  the  passion  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  the  merits  of  the  Blessed  Virgin  Mary,  and  of  all 
the  saints,  whatever  good  thou  hast  done,  or  whatever  evil 
thou  hast  suffered,  be  to  thee  for  the  remission  of  sins,  the 
increase  of  grace,  and  the  reward  of  eternal  life.  Amen. 
The  rituals  permit  that,  for  certain  reasons,  the  said  prayers 
and  invocations  may  be  omitted  ;  so  that  in  extreme  neces- 
sity it  may  briefly  be  said :  /  absolve  thee  from  censures 
and  sins  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and 
of  the  Holy  Ghost.     Amen."     (No.  24.) 

There  are  six  grades  by  which  sinners  are  ordinarily 
led  to  repentance.  The  first  is  a  motion  of  divine  grace, 
according  to  Jer.  xxxi.  19.  After  thou  didst  convert  me, 
I  DID  PENANCE.  The  second  is  a  motion  of  faith,  accord- 
ing to  Heb.  xi.  6.  He  that  comes  to  God  must  believe. 
The  third  is  the  fear  of  punishment :  Eccle.  i.  27.  The 
fear  of  the  Lord  driveth  out  sin.  The  fourth  is  an  act  of 
hope  :  Matt.  ix.  2.  Son,  be  of  good  heart,  thy  sins  are 
forgiven  thee.  The  fifth  is  an  act  of  the  love  of  God,  by 
which  they  begin  to  love  God  as  the  fountain  of  all  Jus- 


CONCERNING  PENANCE.  445 

tice :  Cone.  Trid.  The  sixth  is  the  proper  act  of  penance, 
viz.,  SorroiD,  or  contrition,  through  some  hatred  and  detest- 
ation  against  sins,  as  injurious  to  God,  with  a  resolution  of 
beginning  a  new  life,  to  which  in  the  New  Law,  the  desire 
of  baptism  or  of  the  sacrament  of  penance  is  necessarily  to 
be  connected."     (No.  27.) 

The  effects  of  penance  are :  "1.  The  remission  of  sins, 
and  of  eternal  punishment,  and  of  all  temporal  punishment. 

2.  The  revival  of  virtues,  and  of  good  works,  or  merits. 
But  besides  the  abovementioned  these  effects  are  assigned. 

3.  Sanctifying  grace  which  is  imparted  by  the  power  of  the 
sacrament  through  the  due  administration.  4.  Also,  sacra- 
mental graces  from  the  due  administration,  or  actual  graces ; 
also  such  as  are  to  be  given  subsequently  in  order  to  per- 
form works  of  penance,  to  avoid  sins,  to  overcome  tempta- 
tions, &c.  5.  There  is  wont  at  times,  says  Council  of 
Trent,  sess.  14.  c.  3.  to  follow  peace  and  security  of  con- 
science with  very  great  spiritual  consolation."     (No.  29.) 

So  long  as  a  man  is  in  the  state  of  probation,  all  sins 
whatever  may  be  remitted  through  penance.     (No.  30.) 

When  a  fault  is  forgiven,  the  guilt  of  eternal  punishment 
is  always  removed ;  but  the  whole  temporal  penalty  is  not 
always  remitted,  and  must  be  expiated  here,  or  in  another 
period,  or  in  purgatory.  This  point  sectarians  assail,  be- 
cause it  involves  the  necessity  of  admitting  purgatory,  indul- 
gences, and  works  of  satisfaction.  As  proofs  of  the  truth 
of  the  Romish  doctrine,  we  are  referred  to  the  Council  of 
Trent,  and  2  Sam.  xii.  18,  where  David  was  punished  for 
adultery  with  the  death  of  the  child,  after  it  had  been  said  to 
him :  the  Lord  hath  taken  away,  or  hath  forgiven,  thy 
sin;  so  also  ch.  xxiv.  15 — for  the  sin  of  numbering  the 
people  he  suffered  the  plague ;  thus  Moses,  Numb,  xxvii. 
13,  was  shut  out  from  the  promised  land :  thus  Adam  was 
sent  out  to  suffer  many  calamities,  Gen.  iii.  17,  18,  19. 
Sometimes,  however,  with  the  fault,  all  temporal  punish- 
ment may  be  remitted.     (No.  36.) 

The  faithful  may  be  delivered  from  temporal  punish- 
ments :  "  1.  By  baptism,  by  the  sacrifice  of  the  mass,  and 
by  sacramental  pe'nances  by  their  own  power ;  also  by  mar- 
tyrdom ex  privilegio.     2.  By  indulgences,  by  the  interces- 


446  CONCERNING  PENANCfi. 

sions  of  the  saints  in  heaven,  and  by  th^  prayers  and  satis- 
factions of  just  men  on  earth. 

"  3.  By  our  own  good  works,  and  sufferings,  disease,  and 
punishments  endured  from  the  love  of  Christ,  in  a  state  of 
sanctifying  grace :  which  may  avail,  not  only  by  way  of 
pure  suffering  or  satisfaction,  but  also  by  way  of  merit  and 
imputation.  The  dead  in  purgatory  are  freed  from  their 
temporal  penalties.  1.  By  their  own  personal  suffering  or 
endurance  of  punishments:  but  this  endurance  does  not 
avail  for  them  by  way  of  merit,  but  only  of  satisfaction. 
2.  By  the  sacrifice  of  the  mass,  and  indulgences,  by  the  in« 
tercessions  of  the  saints,  and  by  the  good  works  of  just  men. 
Infer  from  these  things  that  temporal  punishments  may 
more  numerously,  easily  and  abundantly  be  taken  away  in 
this  life  than  in  purgatory  :  and  that  he  is  enriched  more 
than  by  usury,  who  takes  care  to  make  satisfaction  in  this 
life."     (No.  37.) 

The  remains  of  sin,  such  as  depraved "  habits  and  cus- 
toms, corruption,  or  indisposition  of  the  appetite,  passions, 
fancy,  and  spirits  or  humours,  ignorance,  dulness,  blindness 
of  mind,  lethargy  in  respect  to  spiritual  things,  trouble  of 
conscience,  dread  of  the  future  state,  &c.,  are  not  removed 
by  penance.     (No.  38.) 

Contrition  is  defined  as  "  a  sorrow  of  mind,  and  detest- 
ation of  a  sin  committed,  with  a  resolution  of  not  sinning  in 
future."  Amongst  the  rest  it  is  said  ;  "  Our  heretics  con- 
tend, that  penance  does  not  consist  in  sorrow  for,  and  detest- 
ation of  past  offences,  but  in  a  mere  reformation  for  the 
future:  and  they  bring  forward  as  objections  certain  pas- 
sages of  sacred  Scripture.  Is.  i.  16.  Cease  to  do  evil; 
Ps.  xxxiii.  15.  Turn  away  from  evil  and  do  good." 
(No.  43.) 

The  next  twenty  sections  treat  of  the  various  divisions, 
and  subdivisions  of  contrition,  and  present  questions  of  little 
or  no  general  interest. 

Of  Sacramental  Confession.     (No.  63.) 

"  What  is  sacramental  confession  ?  It  is  the  voluntary 
accusation  of  one's  own  sins  made  to  a  priest  having  juris- 
diction, in  order  to  obtain  remission  of  them  by  virtue  of 
the  keys." 


CONCERNING  PENANCE.  447 

"  By  what  authority  has  confession  heen  introduced  ? 
By  positive,  divine  command,  inasmuch  as  it  was  instituted 
by  Christ  the  Lord.  It  is  proved  by  tradition,  and  by  the 
definition  of  the  Council  of  Trent.  It  is  proved  also  by  the 
words  of  Christ,  John  xx.  23,  as  was  proved  above.  Some 
with  St.  Thomas,  understand  the  text,  James  v.  16  :  Con- 
fess one  with  another,  of  sacramental  confession.  "  The 
Calvinists  object  that  auricular  confession  was  introduced  by 
human  authority  in  the  Ath  Lateran  Council,  under  In- 
nocent III.  in  the  thirteenth  century.  The  fathers  of  the 
Council  of  Trent,  sess.  xiv.  c.  5,  reply,  that  this  is  an  empty 
calumny  of  the  heretics ;  but  in  that  council  only  the  time 
of  the  annual  confession,  was  determined  and  commanded  ; 
which  had  before  been  already  observed  in  the  church.  Just 
reasoning  refutes  this  objection :  because  it  is  not  conceivable 
neither  is  it  possible  that  all  men  would  without  any  contra- 
diction have  tolerated  so  heavy  a  burden  as  the  confession 
of  secret  sins,  unless  holy  church  had  practised  it  from  the 
beginning  by  divine  command:  now  no  history  makes  men- 
tion of  a  contradiction ;  therefore,  &c. 

The  fact  that  we  find  no  objection  to  auricular  confession  in  any 
early  ecclesiastical  historian  effectually  establishes  one  of  two  things ; 
it  proves  either  that  the  church  generally  was  satisfied  that  it  was  a 
divine  institution,  or  else,  that  nobody  knew  any  thing  at  all  about  it ; 
of  the  two  we  suppose  the  latter  to  be  the  more  probable. 

"  Ohj.  Nectarius  the  bishop  of  Constantinople  abrogated 
confession  in  the  fourth  contury  ;  as  Socrates  and  Sozome- 
nus  relate :  therefore  confession  is  not  of  divine  institution. 
Ans.  Baronius  accuses  their  histories  of  falsehood.  The 
usual  answer  is,  that  in  this  instance  sacramental  confession 
was  not  abrogated,  but  public  confession  before  the  people, 
or  perhaps  only  the  public  confession  of  secret  sins,  or  the 
mere  mention  of  an  accomplice ;  from  the  occasion  that  a 
certain  noble  woman  through  an  indiscreet  zeal  had  publicly 
confessed  a  sin  with  a  deacon  in  the  temple,  from  which 
public  confession,  scandal  and  murmuring  of  the  people  had 
resulted.  In  the  west  however,  the  practice  of  public  con- 
fession lasted  till  beyond  the  sixth  century." 

"  What  benefits  does  the  confession  of  sins  afford?  Be- 
side the  effects  mentioned  (No.  29.)  it  affords  the  following 
advantages :  1.  Proper  counsels  and  remedies  against  sins  are 


448  CONCERNING  PENANCE. 

received  from  the  confessor.  2.  Through  the  shame  and 
humiliation  of  confession,  it  serves  usefully  for  some  Httle 
satisfaction  for  past  offences,  and  for  restraining  from  future 
sins.  Sacramental  confession  was  prefigured  in  this  that 
Christ,  Matt.  viii.  4,  sent  the  lepers  to  the  priests :  also  that 
under  the  old  law,  sinners  were  compelled  to  go  to  the 
priests  to  offer  sacrifices  for  their  sins.  And  what  is  more, 
Corn,  a  Lapide  thinks  that  under  the  old  law  there  was  an 
obligation  to  confess  all  sins  to  the  priests :  and  he  proves 
this  by  the  variety  of  the  sacrifices  for  sins.  The  multifari- 
ous expiations  and  purifications  in  the  old  law  were  figures 
of  the  sacrament  of  penance." 

Sacramental  confession  is  enjoined  both  by  a  divine  and 
ecclesiastical  precept.  It  is  obligatory  upon  every  baptized 
person  who  is  conscious  of  having  committed  mortal  sin. 
(No.  64.) 

According  to  a  decree  of  a  Lateran  council :  "  Every  one 
of  the  faithful  of  both  sexes,  after  he  {or  she)  shall  have 
reached  the  years  of  discretion,  must  faithfully  confess 
all  his  (or  her)  sins,  alone,  at  least  once  a  year  to  the 
proper  priest,  iSfc.  Which  the  council  of  Trent  has  con- 
firmed, sess.  xiv.  c.  5  and  8,  and  which  is  commonly  recited 
among  the  five  precepts  of  the  church."     (No.  16.) 

It  is  sufficient  if  this  is  done  in  any  part  of  the  year ;  but 
the  custom  of  the  faithful  fixes  the  time  at  i^laster,  and  the 
synod  of  Mechlin  has  resolved  that  they  cannot  be  admitted 
to  the  sacrament  who  have  not  confessed  in  Lent,  and  this 
mode  of  confessing  in  Lent  the  council  of  Trent  approves. 
(No.  67.) 

"  Who  are  under  obligation  by  the  ecclesiastical  pre- 
cept of  confession  ?  All  baptized  persons  who  have  attained 
to  years  of  discretion  and  have  sinned.  When  may  they  be 
presumed  to  have  reached  those  years  of  discretion  ? 
When  they  have  attained  to  such  a  use  of  reason  that  they 
are  able  to  discern  between  moral  good  and  evil,  &c." 

"  Boys  are  presumed  to  have  reached  this  period  of  the 
use  of  reason,  usually  about  the  seventh  or  eighth  year  of 
their  age:  some  sooner,  others  later:  for  a  discrepancy 
occurs  according  to  the  development  of  the  brain,  and  educa- 
tion and  practice :  Greg.  Bk.  iv.     Dial.  c.  xviii.  tells  of  a 


CONCERNING  PENANCE.  449 

boy  five  years  old  condemned  for  blasphemy :  so  that  some- 
times it  may  be  proper  to  say  with  St.  Augustine  :  So  little 
a  boy,  and  so  great  a  sinner.  Therefore  even  very  young 
children  may  profitably  be  sent  to  a  confessor,  in  order  that 
the  priest  may  judge  of  their  discretion,  and  the  boys  them- 
selves may  learn  and  become  accustomed  to  confess.  In 
truth  this"  is  a  great  part  of  the  pastoral  care,  that  a  pastor 
on  every  Lord's  day,  should  allure  some  of  the  little  children 
to  the  confessional,  whom  he  may  hear  whilst  others  who 
are  adults  do  not  come ;  for  he  who  wishes  to  reform  a  parish 
and  bring  it  to  better  fruit,  must  begin  with  the  children. 
"  Are  children  therefore  of  eight  or  nine  years  to  be  sa- 
cramentally  absolved  every  year  1  Yes,  and  oftener,  if  they 
are  found  to  have  committed  afl|:ions  mortally  sinful."  •  The 
precept  of  confession  is  obligatory  at  an  earlier  period  than 
that  of  communion.     (No.  68.) 

If  a  child  concerning  whom  it  is  doubtful  whether  he  has 
attained  to  years  of  discretion,  is  in  danger  of  death,  he  should 
be  absolved  on  the  condition.  If  thou  hast  sinned,  or  if  thou 
art  capable,  and  in  a  similar  condition  the  sacrament  of 
extreme  unction,  may  also  be  conferred.  But  if  the  sins  of 
a  child  are  such,  as  to  be  mortal,  and  he  has  attained  to  years 
of  discretion,  it  is  necessary  to  endeavour  to  produce  the 
proper  disposition,  and  absolve  him  on  the  condition,  If  thou 
hast  sinned,  &c.     (No.  69.) 

Deaf  and  dumb  persons  are  also  obliged  to  confess  by 
signs,  &c.    (No.  70.) 

Whether  the  precept  of  annual  confession  is  of  obligation 
in  the  case  of  those  who  have  committed  only  venial  offences, 
is  a  controverted  point ;  but  the  affirmative  opinion  is  to  be 
practically  followed.    (No.  71.) 

"  What  is  the  punishment  of  those  who  transgress  the 
ecclesiastical  precept  of  annual  confession  7  These  things 
are  decreed  in  the  chapter,  Every  one  of  both  sexes,  <^c. 
Living,  let  him  be  sequestered  from  the  threshold  of  the 
church,  and  dying,  let  him  be  deprived  of  Christian  burial : 
that  is  to  say,  when  these  two  things  concur,  that  this  omis- 
sion is  notorious,  and  that  at  the  close  of  life  he  has  given 
no  signs  of  sorrow ;  which  is  inferred  from  the  Roman 
ritual.  The  punishment  of  one  who  does  not  commune  at 
Easter  is  the  same.  Tliis  punishment  is  not,  properly  speak- 
38 


450  CONCERNING  PENANCE. 

ing,  excommunication,  but  as  it  were,  a  certain  part  of  it,  as 
Steyaert  says."    (No.  72.) 

Frequent  confession  is  advised.    (No.  73.) 

"  Sixteen  conditions  of  a  legitimate  confession  are  wont 
to  be  mentioned  by  St.  Thomas,  and  the  doctors,  which  are 
contained  in  these  four  lines — 

"  Sit  simplex,  humilis  confessio,  pura,  fidelis, 
Atque  frequens,  nuda  et  discreta,  libens,  verecunda, 
Integra,  secreta,  et  lacrymabilis,  accelerata, 
Fortis,  et  accusans,  et  sit  parere  parata. 

Let  the  confession  be  simple,  humble,  pure,  faithful, 

And  frequent,  naked  and  discreet,  ready,  modest. 

Entire,  secret,  and  tearful,  rapid. 

Bold,  and  accusing,  and  let  u  be  prepared  to  obey."  (No.  75.) 

"  How  great  a  si?i  does  he  commit  who  speaks  a  false- 
hood in  confession  ?  If  he  lies,  accusing  himself  of  a 
mortal  sin  which  he  has  not  committed,  or  denying  a  mor- 
tal sin  which  he  has  committed,  and  which  ought  to  be  ex- 
pressed in  this  confession,  he  commits  a  mortal  sacrilege ; 
because,  in  a  serious  matter  he  perverts  sacramental  judg- 
ment. However,  the  sincerity  of  scrupulous  and  good 
minds  is  not  to  be  at  once  severely  blamed  :  for  those  per- 
sons wishing  not  to  deceive,  but  to  choose  more  securely, 
accuse  themselves  more  severely.  If  any  one  lies  in  con- 
fession, saying  that  he  has  committed  a  venial  sin  which  he 
has  not  committed,  and  that  venial  offence  is  the  only  mat- 
ter of  absolution,  he  commits  mortal  sacrilege :  because  he 
renders  absolution,  or  the  sacrament  invalid.  But  if  in  the 
same  confession  he  confesses  other  sins  which  he  has  com- 
mitted, with  due  contrition  for  them,  the  sacrament  seems  to 
be  valid,  and  this  falsehood  to  be  only  venial  sacrilege :  be- 
cause the  deception  is  not  in  an  important  thing,  neither  in  the 
entire  nor  in  the  proximate  matter."    (No.  76.) 

Hypocrisy  in  confession  is  a  mortal  sin.  (No.  77.) 
The  integrity  of  the  confession  is  distinguished  as  mate- 
rial and  formal.  "  That  confession  is  called  materially  en- 
tire, in  which  all  and  every  mortal  sin  committed  after  bap- 
tism, as  well  internal  as  external,  not  yet  directly  and 
legitimately  subjected  to  sacramental  absolution,  is  exposed 
to  one  and  the  same  confessor,  in  order  to  one  and  the  same 


CONCERNING  PENANCE.  451 

sacramental  absolution.  A  confession  is  called  formally 
entire,  when  after  a  diligent  examination  of  the  conscience, 
all  mortal  sins  committed  since  baptism,  and  not  yet  directly 
and  legitimately  subjected  to  the  keys,  and  which  must  and 
may  be  expressed  here  and  now  in  this  confession,  are 
revealed  to  one  and  the  same  confessor ;  although,  perhaps 
something  may  be  omitted  for  a  legitimate  cause;  v.  g.,.when 
any  one  confesses  two  sins,  and  from  blameless  inadvertency, 
omits  a  third."  "  Formal  integrity  is  sufficient,  and  this  is 
also  absolutely  necessary ;  so  that  a  confession  not  formally 
entire,  is  invalid  and  sacrilegious."     (No.  78.) 

An  accomplice  in  crime  must  be  revealed  in  confession, 
when  the  integrity  of  the  confession  requires  it ;  but  if  he 
can  confess  his  own  sins  without  it,  the  penitent  ought  not 
to  mention  an  accomplice.     (No.  80.) 

The  examination  of  a  conscience  is  defined  thus :  It  is 
the  reconsideration  of  committed  sins,  by  a  diligent  discus- 
sion of  the  conscience,  hy  applying  the  understanding  to 
know,  and  the  memory  to  recollect.     (No.  81.) 

*'  Why  ought  the  number  of  sins  to  be  expressed  in  con- 
fession? 1.  In  order  that  all  sins  may  be  revealed  ;  2.  And 
that  the  condition,  custom,  affection,  danger,  &c.,  of  the 
penitent  may  be  learned."  He  does  not  confess  properly, 
who  says,  I  have  sometimes,  or  often  committed  this  sin, 
because  he  does  not  express  a  fixed  number.  If  he  does  not 
know  the  precise  number,  he  ought  to  express  the  more  pro- 
bable one,  by  saying,  v.  g.,  I  have  done  it  twenty  times, 
more  or  less.  If  the  penitent  is  ignorant,  and  cannot  even 
tell  the  probable  number,  the  confessor  must  help  him,  by 
inquiring,  how  often  in  a  month,  or  in  a  week,  or  in  a  day, 
he  has  committed  the  sin ;  and  then  for  how  many  days, 
months,  or  years,  he  has  continued  in  those  sins,  &c.  In  a 
case  of  hatred,  he  ought  to  declare  the  number  of  persons 
whom  he  hates ;  so  in  a  case  of  detraction,  because  there 
are  just  as  many  sins  as  there  are  persons.  (No.  84,  ana 
corollary.) 

All  CIRCUMSTANCES  which  change  the  kind  of  the  sin, 
and  which  materially  aggravate  or  diminish  it,  are  to  be 
mentioned  in  confession  ;  because,  unless  this  is  done,  sins 
are  not  entirely  declared  by  penitents ;  and  the  confessors, 
who  are  judges  of  the  grievousness  of  crimes,  cannot  ascer- 


452  CONCERNING  PENANCE. 

tain  their  degree  without  it,  nor  impose  the  proper  penance ; 
besides,  a  person  concealing  such  a  circumstance,  may  omit 
a  mortal  sin  in  confession ;  suppose,  for  instance,  that  some 
one  who  is  bound  by  a  vow  of  chastity,  confesses  fornica- 
tion, but  is  silent  on  the  circumstance  of  his  vow.  (No.  86.) 
The  confessor  must  interrogate  the  penitent,  for 
this  his  office  of  physician,  judge  and  counsellor,  requires. 
The  Mechlin  pastorale  cautions  priests  not  to  detain  any  one, 
particularly  young  people  of  both  sexes,  with  inquisitive  or 
useless  questions :  and  not  imprudently  to  interrogate  others 
about  things  of  which  they  know  nothing,  lest  they  might 
occasion  scandal,  and  their  penitent  might  learn  to  sin.  "If 
the  priest  observes  that  the  penitent  is  silent  from  shame  or 
fear,  it  is  proper  to  begin  the  interrogations  from  the  greater, 
by  proposing  to  the  same,  the  question,  v.  g.,  whether  he 
has  committed  homicide,  or  adultery,  or  a  sacrilegious  theft, 
&c.,  because  then  the  penitent  will  promptly  reply,  that  it  is 
not  so  enormous  a  crime,  and  he  will  venture  to  make  known 
his  sin,  which  is  less,  that  he  may  avoid  the  suspicion  of  the 
greater.  But  if  the  penitent  may  be  supposed  to  omit  the 
sin  from  ignorance  or  simplicity,  questions  are  put  from  the 
less,  lest  perchance,  he  may  learn  to  sin.  Schema  8,  affords 
an  example  of  this.  How  shall  a  confessor  conduct  him- 
self toioards  those,  who  confess  nothing  unless  they  are 
asked  7  If  this  happens  through  neglect  of  examination, 
they  are  ordinarily  to  be  sent  back  to  a  diligent  examination 
of  conscience,  and  they  are  to  be  admonished  to  be  sorry, 
and  blame  themselves  for  the  neglect.  But  if  it  proceeds 
from  bashfulness,  timidity,  simplicity,  or  from  the  rudeness 
of  uncultivated  nature,  they  are  to  be  kindly  and  patiently 
received  and  assisted.  Hence,  those  confessors  commit  no 
small  deviation  from  the  path  of  prudent  judgment,  who, 
when  some  simple,  and  perhaps  pious  person,  says  .in  con- . 
fession ;  Sir,  I  do  not  know  what  to  confess,  confound  and 
ironically  insult  him,  by  saying;  I  will  put  you  on  the  altar, 
because  you  are  holy,  for  you  have  not  sinned,"  &c. 
(No.  90.) 

OP  interrogations  in  particular. 

"  Concerning  what  things  may  the  confessor  interrogate 
a  penitent  7    1 .  How  long  ago,  or  since  what  time  he  has 


CONCERNING  PENANCE.  453 

confessed  ?  2.  What  is  his  condition,  (unless  it  should  be 
known),  that  is  to  say,  whether  he  is  married,  bound  by  a 
vow,  the  master  of  a  household,  a  merchant,  labourer,  &c., 
in  order  that  he  may  be  interrogated  about  sins  usually  com- 
mitted in  such  a  state.  3.  Whether  he  has  performed  the 
penance  imposed.  4.  Whether  he  has  regularly  and  entirely 
confessed  at  other  times.  5.  Whether  he  has  previously, 
diligently  scrutinized  or  examined  his  conscience  as  he 
ought.  6.  Whether  he  has  learned  the  rudiments  and  arti- 
cles of  faith,  and  other  things  necessary  to  be  known.  7.  If 
the  penitent  has  not  expressed  the  number,  and  kinds,  and 
circumstances,  of  the  sins  necessary  to  be  explained,  let  the 
priest  prudently  ask  him.  Moreover,  lest  the  confessor 
should  be  embarrassed  in  investigating  the  circumstances  of 
any  sin,  let  him  have  this  little  line  of  circumstances  in 
readiness. 

"  Who,  what,  where,  by  what  helps,  why,  how,  when. 

"But  what  may  be  denoted  by  each  of  these  particles,  is 
compendiously  explained  at  the  close  of  the  practical  Sche- 
mata, at  the  end  of  this  volume."     (No.  91.) 

Probably  the  very  best  idea  of  the  character  of  the  Romish  doctrine 
and  practice  of  confession,  will  be  afforded  by  the  translation  of  these 
practical  exemplifications  of  the  orthodox  mode  of  ransacking  the 
conscience  of  a  penitent.  I  shall,  therefore,  present  them  without 
delay.     But  first  observe : 

"  Sacramental  confession  ought  regularly  to  be  made  by 
proper  word  of  mouth  ;  because  this  mode  is  the  most  per- 
fect, and  involves  greater  humility  and  bashfulness :  add  to 
this,  that  it  has  been  the  perpetual  practice  of  the  Church. 
When,  however,  the  penitent  has  not  the  use  of  his  tongue, 
or  some  other  reason  exists,  a  confession  by  writing,  or  by 
any  kind  of  nods  and  signs,  is  sufficient,"  &c.  A  confes- 
sion may  also,  in  case  of  necessity,  be  made  by  an  interpre- 
ter; but  a  penitent  is  not  obliged  to  make  such  a  confession. 
(No.  93.) 

38* 


454  CONCERNING  PENANCE. 


PRACTICAL    MODELS. 

"  A  method  of  interrogating  a  penitent,  who  confesses  in  an  igno- 
rant manner,  not  sufficiently  explaining  the  object,  number  and  cir- 
cumstances. 

The  penitent  confesses  :  I  have  sworn. 

Confessor.  What  words  did  you  say  ?  Penitent.  By  my  soul  what 
I  assert  is  true :  I  did  not  use  any  other  forms  of  swearing.  Conf. 
How  often  ?  Pen.  Seven  times  from  the  time  of  the  last  confession, 
made  at  the  festival  of  the  Lord's  nativity.  Conf.  Did  you  say  it  from 
habit  ?  or  from  an  unpremeditated  impulse  ?  or  deliberately  ?  Pen. 
Deliberately  enough,  but  not  from  habit. 

Examination  concerning  the  addition  of  truth. 
Conf.  Did  you  swear  contrary  to  the  truth  ?  Pen.  I  have  once  con- 
firmed  a  falsehood  by  a  positive  oath.  Conf.  Did  you  know  that  it 
was  false,  when  you  swore  ?  Pen.  Yes,  I  knew  it.  Conf.  You  have 
committed  a  grievous  sin  of  perjury ;  besides  if  you  can  and  ought  to 
foresee  or  fear  that  losses,  scandals,  or  any  bad  results  will  follow,  de- 
clare  them,  and  tell  which  of  them  have  already  resulted  :  make  amends 
for  the  injuries  inflicted,  remove  the  bad  results,  and  if  some  will  still 
follow,  you  ought  to  prevent  them.  Pen.  Nothing  of  these,  for  it  was 
a  lie  spoken  in  jest,  which  I  confirmed  with  an.  oath.  Conf.  Have 
you  fulfilled  your  promissory  oaths,  with  which  you  swore  that  you 
would  do  something  ?  Pen.  Once  I  did  not  fulfil,  through  negligence. 
Conf.  What  had  you  sworn  ?  Pen,  I  had  sworn  to  pay  a  debt  of  ten 
florins,  within  three  days,  and  I  delayed  it  beyond  a  month.  Conf. 
Did  not  the  other  consent  to  the  delay,  at  least  implicitly  ?  Or  did  not 
other  claims  excuse  you,  by  which  the  obligation  of  an  oath  sometimes 
ceases  ?  Pen.  No.  Conf.  You  have  sinned  grievously,  and  you  will 
pay  the  debt  as  soon  as  possible.  Pen.  I  will  do  so.  Conf.  Could  it 
be  foreseen  that  any  injuries  or  other  bad  results  would  follow  ?  Pen. 
None.  Conf.  When  you  swore,  had  you  the  intention  of  fulfilling  the 
oath?  Pen.  I  thought  it  would  be  impossible  within  three  days. 
Conf.  Therefore  accuse  yourself  farther  of  formal  perjury  from  the 
defect  of  formal  virtue. 

Examination  concerning  the  addition  of  justice. 
Conf.  Did  you  swear  anything  unlawful  or  not  decent  ?  v.  g.,  that 
you  would  inflict  injury  on  any  one  ?     Pen.  Yes,  once.     Conf.  What 
was  it?     Pen.  I  swore   that   I  would   break  my  neighbour's  arm. 


CONCERNING  PENANCE.  455 

CoNF.  Had  you  the  intention  of  doing  it,  when  you  s?wore  ?  Pen.  Yes. 
CoNF.  You  have  grievously  offended  against  religion  and  against  jus- 
tice :  it  is  not  lawful  for  you  to  fulfil  what  you  have  sworn  :  in  addi- 
tion, tell  for  what  length  of  time  you  persisted  in  this  bad  intention  of 
doing  injuries,  and  what  harm  must  be  apprehended  as  likely  to  result. 
Pen.  &c. 

II. 
CONCERNING  HABITUAL  SWEARERS. 
Pen.  I  have  sworn  in  saying :  Par  Dieu.  Conf.  How  often  ?  Pen. 
Two  hundred  times,  more  or  less,  in  the  time  of  two  months,  during 
which  I  have  not  confessed.  Conf.  Therefore  you  labour  under  the 
habit  of  swearing  ?  Pen.  Yes.  Conf.  Did  you  use  other  words  or 
forms  ?  Pen.  No.  Conf.  Do  you  swear  indiscriminately  truth  and 
falsehood,  things  lawful  and  unlawful  ?  Pen.  From  habit  I  speak  for 
the  most  part  before  I  maturely  examine  them.  Conf.  Therefore  the 
most  of  your  oaths  are  mortal  sins,  on  account  of  the  danger  of  swear- 
ing that  which  is  false  or  unlawful.  How  often  have  you  sworn  con- 
trary  to  truth  ?  Pen.  Certainly  at  least  ten  times,  and  once  I  swore 
knowingly  to  a  falsehood,  by  a  positive  oath.  Conf.  Did  you  fulfil 
what  you  swore  you  would  do  ?  Pen.  Five  times  I  did  not  fulfil  it 
in  a  small  matter ;  but  people  did  not  accept  my  oaths,  because  they 
knew  that  I  swear  habitually.  Conf.  How  often  have  you  sworn 
something  unlawful,  or  not  decent,  in  addition  against  justice  ?  Pen. 
About  six  times,  that  I  might  vindicate  myself  for  refusing  the  com- 
mon offices  of  charity  to  another.  Conf.  Did  any,  and  what  injuries 
or  losses  ensue,  or  were  they  to  be  apprehended,  especially  scandals  in 
regard  to  children  and  domestics,  who  usually  hear  and  imitate? 
Pen.  None,  except  perhaps  general  scandal  in  the  hearers  ;  for  1  have 
no  children  or  domestics.  Conf.  How  long  has  this  habit  continued  ? 
Pen.  Now,  five  years.  Conf.  How  often  have  you  confessed  in  that 
time  ?  Pen.  Three  times  every  year.  Conf.  What  means  have  con- 
fessors prescribed  to  you  ?  Pen.  That  I  should  read  one  Ave  Maria 
as  often  as  I  swore.  Conf.  Did  you  observe  this  ?  Pen.  Whenever 
I  remembered :  very  often.  Conf.  St.  Francis  Sales  teaches  that  ab- 
solution must  be  delayed,  because  you  do  not  stretch  every  nerve  to 
eradicate  the  vicious  habit.  Therefore  return  after  eight  days,  and 
meanwhile  use  these  more  efficacious  means,  «&c.  Besides,  the  pre- 
ceding confessions  are  to  me  very  doubtful  as  to  their  value,  and  must 
therefore  be  repeated,  because  in  the  whole  time  of  the  voluntary 
habit,  you  have  persevered  in  the  intention  and  desire  of  sinning,  and 
thus  you  have  committed  as  many  sacrileges  as  you  liavc  received  sa- 


456  CONCERNING  PENANCE. 

craments.  Therefore  you  will  institute  an  examination  of  your  con- 
science concerning  them,  and  a  general  confession  from  the  time  that 
the  habit  has  commenced.  Did  you  not  certainly  sometimes  do  better 
for  a  considerable  time  after  confession,  by  very  great  anxiety  to  eradi- 
cate  the  habit  ?     Pen.  I  did  not  pay  special  regard." 

More  efficacious  means  against  the  habit  of  swearing. 
"  They  are  those,  which  remove  precipitation,  and  produce  delibera- 
tion. 1.  At  every  oath,  let  him  immediately  say  openly :  I  retract 
what  I  said,  I  am  sorry  for  it,  and  I  will  say  so  no  more,  &c.  This 
is  best  if  it  can  be  obtained,  because  by  thus  publicly  retracting,  the 
person  swearing  repairs  the  scandal,  which  he  occasioned.  2.  Let  him 
immediately  recite  Pater  noster  and  Hail  Mary,  kneel  down,  or  do 
some  other  work  of  penance.  3.  Let  him  immediately  put  aside  from 
one  pocket  into  another,  a  farthing,  that  he  may  give  it  to  the  first 
poor  man  whom  he  meets.  4.  Let  him  ask,  that  others,  companions 
or  servants  may  immediately  reprove  him.  5.  Every  week  let  him 
return  to  the  same  confessor." 

in. 

OF    BLASPHEMIES. 

*'  Pen.  I  have  said  :  Mort  Dieu  and  Sucre  Dieu.  Conf.  From  cus- 
tom, and  how  often  ?  Pen.  Both,  three  times,  not  from  custom,  but 
from  levity.  Conf.  Did  you  commit  six  crimes  of  blasphemy  ?  Pen. 
I  have  sometimes  heard  it  said  that  these  are  enormous  oaths.  Conf. 
Did  you  say  these  things  by  way  of  oath,  in  order  to  affirm  or  deny 
something,  and  this  in  addition  against  truth  and  justice  ?  Pen.  No. 
Conf.  Did  scandal,  or  any  other  evil  follow,  or  was  it  at  least  to  be 
feared?     Pen.  No. 

"  If  the  penitent  is  an  habitual  blasphemer,  let  him  be  treated  as  in 
Schema  II. ;  if  bad  results  have  followed,  &c.,  as  in  I." 

Appendix. 

"  Pen.  I  have  said  :  Par  Dieu  and  Mort  Dieu. 

"  In  this  case  each  must  be  examined  separately  :  for  par  Dieu  de- 
notes a  simple  oath  :  mort  Dieu  also  contains  blasphemy,  therefore  the 
confessor  will  ask  :  How  often  did  you  say,  par  Dieu  ?  How  often 
mort  Dieu  ?  &c.  But  if  this  swearer  is  such  a  one  who  babbles  out 
indiscriminately,  mort  Dieu,  or  par  Dieu,  whichever  first  comes  into 
his  mouth,  without  any  difference,  he  will  be  guilty  of  blasphemy  in 
each  act,  even  when  he  pronounces  only  par  Dieu,  because  in  every 
act,  he  was  ready  for  either  one  or  the  other." 


CONCERNING  PENANCE.  457 

•  IV. 

OF  A  PROXIMATE  OCCASION. 
"  Pen.  I  have  been  drunk.  Conf.  How  often  ?  Pen.  I  am  ac- 
justomed  to  be  drunk  five  or  six  times  in  a  month.  Conf.  Were  you 
quite  drunk,  destitute  of  the  use  of  reason  ?  Pen.  So  that  I  was  inca- 
pacitated even  for  common  business.  Conf.  From  what  occasion  do 
these  drunken  excesses  happen  ?  Pen.  From  frequenting  the  tavern. 
Conf.  Frequenting  the  tavern  is  to  you  the  proximate  occasion  of  sin. 
How  often  did  you  thus  enter  the  tavern,  even  if  you  were  not  drunk  ? 
Pen.  About  ten  times  a  month :  for  I  am  accustomed  to  enter  the 
tavern  sixteen  times  every  month,  and  out  of  these  I  am  used  to  be 
drunk  six  times  more  or  less.  Conf.  In  these  ten  times  also,  you  are 
guilty  before  God  of  the  sin  of  drunkenness,  because  you  exposed  your- 
self  to  danger.  You  may  elicit  fresh  contrition  for  these,  and  accuse 
yourself  of  them  in  confession.  Have  bad  results  followed,  or  will 
they  follow,  or  were  they  at  least  to  be  feared,  which  you  could  and 
should  have  foreseen  ?  Or  indeed  do  any  usually  follow  ?  Pen.  No  : 
for  when  drunk,  I  am  good  and  peaceable.  Conf.  For  how  long  a 
time  have  you  frequented  the  proximate  occasion  ?  Pen.  Now  for  a 
year.  Conf.  Therefore,  for  a  year  you  have  lived  in  the  desire  or  in- 
tention of  sinning  mortally  :  therefore  you  will  institute  a  general  con- 
fession  of  this  time;  you  will  accuse  yourself  besides  of  having  sacri- 
legiously taken  the  sacraments,  &c." 

A  VOLUNTARY  OCCASION. 
"  CoNF.  Do  you  frequent  from  necessity,  or  indeed  without  any  just 
cause  ?  Pen.  My  profit  is  from  it,  for  I  am  the  agent  of  another  man's 
affairs,  which  must  be  carried  on  in  the  tavern.  Conf.  Have  preced- 
ing confessors  prescribed  to  you  efficacious  means  that  this  occasion 
might  become  remote  ?  Pen.  Yes  :  but  I  know  from  experience  that 
I  cannot  be  kept  from  these  drunken  excesses  by  any  means.  Conf. 
Therefore  yott  will  absolutely  quit  frequenting  taverns :  and  for  this 
reason  you  will  give  up  that  office,  and  assume  another  business  to 
gain  a  livelihood :  if  you  will  not  I  can  not  absolve  you.  Besides  you 
will  institute  a  general  confession  from  the  time  at  which  you  volun- 
tarily retained  the  proximate  occasion,  &c.  Pen.  Ought  I  therefore 
to  retrench  my  mode  of  living  ?  Conf.  You  must  retrench  it :  be- 
cause just  reasons  for  retaining  a  voluntary  proximate  cause  can 
not  be  given." 


458  CONCERNING  PENANCE. 

AN    OCCASION   MORALLY    INVOLUNTARY. 

"CoNF.  Do  you  frequent  from  necessity,  or  indeed  without  any  just 
cause  ?  Pen.  From  necessity,  because  I  am  an  agent,  and  in  this 
way  only  do  I  know  how  to  gain  the  livelihood  necessary  for  my  wife 
and  children,  so  that  I  cannot  give  it  up  except  to  my  serious  loss  : 
and  I  may  fall  perhaps  into  greater  dangers.  Conf.  Have  you  in  the 
mean  time  confessed,  and  have  means  been  prescribed  to  you  ?  Pen. 
No.  Conf.  Therefore,  employ  means  by  which  the  occasion  may 
become  remote :  you  must  not  drink  in  the  tavern,  or  you  must  drink 
only  a  single  pint,  and  you  must  mix  with  it  if  you  conveniently  can,  bit- 
ter herbs,  or  you  must  drink  water  under  another  pretext.  If  drink  be 
offered  you  by  others,  you  must  refuse,  or  else  pretend  that  you  are 
drinking  it.  You  must  return  after  eight  days.  Meanwhile  pray 
earnestly  to  God,  &c." 

V. 

CONCERNING  DETRACTION. 
"  A  method  of  interrogating  a  penitent  in  sins  of  detraction,  who 
confesses  without  expression  of  object  or  circumstances. 

EXAMINATION  CONCERNING  A  FALSE  STATEMENT. 
"  Pen.  I  have  spoken  slander.  Conf.  Is  what  you  have  said  true  or 
false  ?  Pen.  What  I  said  is  false.  Conf.  Is  it  a  very  disgraceful 
defect :  or  is  it  materially  against  the  fame  or  good  reputation  of  this 
person  ?  Pen.  I  think  so.  Conf.  What  then  did  you  say  ?  Pen. 
That  a  certain  respectable  girl  had  committed  fornication.  Conf. 
How  often  did  you  say  this  ?  and  to  how  many  persons  ?  Pen. 
To  three  persons  at  one  time.  Conf.  Have  they  divulged  it  to  others  ? 
Pen.  It  is  so :  for  they  are  talkative  and  loquacious,  and  receive  slander 
greedily.  Conf.  To  how  many  persons  ?  Pen.  I  do  not  know ;  per- 
haps to  ten  people.  Conf.  You  will  immediately  hinder  any  farther 
infamy,  and  personally  or  through  others  restore  the  good  name  with 
all  those,  to  whom  you  or  others  have  divulged  it.  Pen.  How  shall 
I  do  this  ?  Conf.  By  recalling  it,  and  asserting  that  you  have  spo- 
ken that  which  was  false,  and  that  you  are  prepared  to  take  an  oath 
upon  it,  and  to  bring  witnesses,  &c.  Will  you  do  it  ?  Pen.  Yes  I 
will.  Conf.  Could  and  must  any  losses  or  other  evils  be  foreseen  and 
feared,  and  have  in  reality  any  followed  or  will  they  still  follow  ?  Pen. 
Yes.  Conf.  Tell  what  they  are,  and  also  those  which  have  not  yet . 
followed  and  which  will  not  follow,  but  which  you  could  and  must  fear 
will  follow  :  but  those  which   have  followed,  amend,  and  take  Uway 


CONCERNING  PENANCE.  459 

the  evils :  just  as  you  will  be  obliged  to  make  restitution  for  what  will 
follow,  unless  you  prevent  them  :  meanwhile  take  care  that  you  pre- 
vent. Pen.  It  is  well,  &c.  Conf.  Did  the  detraction  or  infamy  extend 
to  some  others,  so  that  they  were  injured  in  their  reputation  also  ? 
Pen.  Yes  truly,  I  mentioned  an  accomplice  with  whom  she  had  com- 
mitted fornication.  Conf.  Of  what  condition,  quality  and  reputation 
was  this  accomplice  ?  Pen.  He  was  not  situated  in  high  life,  but  a 
married  man ;  an  honest  citizen  of  the  common  sort,  having  a  respect- 
able wife  and  children.  Conf.  This  is  another  slander.  You  must 
make  restitution,  &c.     The  rest  must  be  investigated  as  above." 

EXAMINATION  CONCERNING  A  TRUE  STATEMENT. 
"Conf.  Is  what  you  have  said  true  or  false  ?  Pen.  What  I  said  is 
true.  Conf.  And  was  it  public  by  the  publicity  of  the  fact  or  right  ? 
Had  you  just  reasons  for  revealing  it?  Pen.  No.  Conf.  Is  the 
failing  very  disgraceful  with  respect  to  that  person  ?  Pen.  It  seems 
so.  Conf.  What  then  have  you  said  ?  Pen.  That  a  certain  girl  had 
committed  fornication.  Conf.  Is  she  is  a  respectable  girl  or  of  good 
reputation  in  this  respect?  Or  is  she  considered  infamous  in  this 
thing,  because  she  has  frequently  committed  it  ?  Or  is  she  a  harlot  ? 
&c.  Pen.  She  is  acknowledged  as  respectable.  Conf.  To  how  many 
persons  did  you  reveal  it  ?  Pen.  To  three  at  one  time.  Conf.  Have 
they  told  it  to  others  ?  Or  must  you  not  at  least  fear  this  danger  ? 
Pen.  No  :  because  I  knew  them  to  be  prudent,  and  they  reproved  me. 
Conf.  Notwithstanding  this,  you  have  sinned  against  justice  with 
regard  to  the  girl,  and  against  charity  in  regard  to  the  hearers  by 
giving  them  on  your  part,  scandal  or  occasion  that  they  might  sin  in 
listening  to  your  detraction.  Could  actual  injuries  or  other  evils  be 
foreseen  as  likely  to  result  ?  Pen.  No.  Conf.  You  must  restore  the 
reputation  you  have  injured.  Pen.  It  has  already  become  public  and 
known  everywhere.  Conf.  If  it  has  become  public  through  injury, 
you  are  still  obliged  to  make  restitution.  Has  it  perhaps  become  public 
in  some  other  way?  Pen.  It  is  public,  because  a  child  has  notori- 
ously been  born.  Conf.  You  are  liberated  from  the  duty  of  restitution, 
but  you  have  certainly  sinned  because  at  the  time  in  which  you 
revealed  it,  the  fact  was  secret,  nor  was  it  known  that  it  would  bo 
public." 

VI. 

OF  PERSONS  HEARING  SLANDER. 
Pen.  I  have  heard  slander.    Conf.  Did  you  reprove  the  slanderer  ? 
Or  did  you  hinder  the  detraction  in  some  other  way  ?     Or  did  not  the 


460  CONCERNING  PENANCE. 

others  do  this  ?  Pen.  No.  Conf.  Had  you  just  reasons  for  not  reprov 
ing  or  not  hindering,  v.  g.  because  it  was  public,  or  because  no  hop? 
of  good  effect  appeared  :  or  because  you  feared  other  injuries  or  evils  ,* 
or  because  it  was  lawfully  denounced  in  order  to  hinder  the  evil  ?  &c. 
Pen.  I  had  not  any  reasons  to  excuse  me.  Conf.  Was  it  a  very  dis- 
graceful fault  with  respect  to  this  person  ?  What  was  related  ?  And 
what  evils  and  injuries  were  to  be  feared  as  likely  to  follow  ?  Pen.  It 
was  told  of  a  servant  known  to  us,  that  he  once  stole  a  silver  box ; 
but  no  danger  of  loss  or  evil  seems  to  be  feared  from  the  statement. 
Conf.  How  did  you  behave  during  this  detraction?  Were  you 
silent  ?  Did  you  listen  willingly,  and  were  you  secretly  pleased  ? 
Did  you  take  part  by  externally  asking,  conversing,  laughing  ?  &c." 

Against  justice. 
"  Pen.  I  asked  in  an  inquisitive  manner  about  the  circumstances 
and  evidences  of  the  truth  of  the  fact,  which  the  detractor  also  added. 
Conf.  How  many  persons  were  present  hearing  it  ?  Pen.  We  were 
four  who  heard  it.  Conf.  Did  you  communicate  it  to  no  one  farther  ? 
And  did  not  the  others  who  heard  it  do  so  ?  Pen.  No.  Conf.  1.- You 
have  sinned  against  charity  with  respect  to  the  slanderer,  and  the 
hearers  on  account  of  the  scandal.  2.  You  have  sinned  against  jus- 
tice as  co-operating,  with  respect  to  the  person  who  was  slandered, 
and,  therefore,  you  are  bound  to  make  restitution  of  the  character, 
losses,  &c.,  if  the  slanderer  or  the  principals  fail,  or  do  not  make  resti- 
tution." 

Against  charity. 

"  Con.  Did  you  join  in  externally  by  asking,  conversing,  laugh- 
ing ?  ^c.  Pen.  By  no  means,  but  I  was  silent  and  kept  myself  nega- 
tively. Conf.  Were  you  obliged  ex  officio  or  from  justice  to  hinder 
those  sins  or  the  infamy  ?  Pen.  No.  Conf.  You  have  certainly  sin- 
ned against  charity  ;  1.  in  respect  of  the  slanderer,  and  the  hearers, 
because  you  did  not  hinder  the  sins ;  2.  with  regard  to  him,  who  was 
slandered,  because  you  did  not  prevent  the  injury  to  the  reputation, 
and  the  loss  of  your  neighbour ;  all  of  which  you  could  and  should 
prevent  from  charity." 

VII. 

EXAMINATION  CONCERNING  THEFT  OR  INJUSTICE. 
Pen.    I  have   committed   theft.     Conf.    What  have  you   stolen  ? 
Pen.  Seven  florins.    Conf.  Did  you  take  them  from  necessity,  or  from 


CONCERNING  PENANCE.  461 

some  other  cause  ?  Pen.  No  :  but  I  unjustly  took  them  from  a  gentle- 
man whose  servant  I  am.  Conf.  Did  you  steal  them  at  one  time,  or 
many  by  small  thefts?  Pen.  At  several  times  in  the  space  of  four 
weeks.  Conf.  In  how  many  times  ?  Pen.  I  do  not  know.  Conf. 
How  much  did  you  take  at  every  time  ?  Or  how  often  in  the  week  ? 
Pen.  a  shilling,  at  every  time.  Conf.  Was  there  the  desire  or 
inclination  of  stealing  more  at  each  time,  if  occasion  had  offered  ? 
Pen.  No  :  but  I  wished  to  take  a  shilling  only  at  each  time.  Conf. 
Had  you  the  intention,  indeed,  from  the  beginning  of  attaining  to  a 
considerable  sum  through  small  thefts  ?  Pen.  Yes.  Conf.  To  how 
great  a  sum  ?  Pen.  To  the  sum  of  six  or  seven  florins,  in  order  that 
I  might  be  able  to  buy  a  new  cap  and  hose.  Conf.  Therefore,  from 
the  first  time  you  have  sinned  mortally.  During  this  time,  were  the 
internal  acts  of  desire  to  steal  often  repeated  or  renewed,  when  the 
deed  did  not  follow  ?  Pen.  Yes,  perhaps,  fifty  times :  but  I  forbore, 
lest  I  should  be  detected.  Conf.  Have  other  losses  or  injuries  fol- 
lowed ?  Or  must  you  fear  and  foresee  that  they  will  perhaps  fol- 
low ?  Or  are  other  bad  circumstances  known  to  you  ?  Pen.  No- 
thing  of  these.  Conf.  Have  you  made  restitution  ?  Pen.  I  have  not ; 
nor  have  I  anything  which  I  can  restore,  except  the  cap  which  I  have 
bought.  Conf.  You  have  sinned  also  in  this,  that  you  have  made 
yourself  unable ;  see,  however,  if  you  cannot  get  back  the  price  by 
returning  the  cap;  otherwise  you  must  every  day  lay  aside  something 
from  your  daily  wages,  and  you  must  not  enter  a  tavern  unless  you 
have  first  made  restitution.  Pen.  I  will  do  so.  Conf.  For  how  long 
a  time  have  you  remained  in  this  state  without  interruption,  or  with- 
out intention  of  making  restitution  ?  Pen.  For  six  weeks,  namely, 
until  yesterday.  Conf.  Meanwhile,  you  have  not  confessed  ?  Pen. 
No.  Conf.  For  so  long  a  time,  you  have  persisted  in  the  desire  of  the 
mortal  sin,  which  has  been  continually  done,  &c." 

VIII. 
METHOD  OP  PRUDENTLY  EXAMINING  CONCERNING  IM- 
MODEST THOUGHTS. 

"  Pen.  I  have  had  immodest  thoughts.  Conf.  Did  you  afford  cause 
or  occasion  for  them  by  look,  words  ?  &c.  Pen.  No.  Conf.  Did 
you  endeavour  to  repel  them?  Pen.  No.  Conf.  How  long  did  you 
voluntarily  persist  in  them  ?  Pen.  Through  five  Pater  et  Ave. 
Conf.  How  often  did  this  happen?  Pen.  Once.  Conf.  Did  you 
take  pleasure  in  tliem  ?  Pen.  I  did  so.  Conf.  Did  you  give  your 
39 


462  CONCERNING  PENANCE. 

consent  to  any  bad  action,  or  was  there  any  desire  or  intention  of 
doing  a  bad  action  if  the  opportunity  had  been  offered  ?  Pen.  No  : 
but  it  was  merely  a  lingering  delight,  to  which  I  gave  my  consent. 
CoNF.  About  what  object,  and  about  what  thing  was  this  delight  ? 
Pen.  Circa  copulam  cum  filia  honesta  libera,  mihi  nulla  cognatione 
vel  affinitate  juncta  I 

CoNF.  What  are  you,  single,  married,  or  bound  by  a  vow  ?  Pen. 
I  am  a  single  young  man.  Conf.  An  inde  secuteB  sunt  aliquae  com- 
motiones  carnales  in  corpore  ?  Pen.  Yes.  Conf.  Did  you  endeavour 
to  resist  these  impulses  and  to  repel  them  ?  Pen.  No  :  but  I  simply 
permitted  them.  Conf.  An  secuta  est  poUutio?  Pen.  Yes.  Conf. 
Did  you  afterwards  persist  in  the  thoughts  and  pleasures  ?  Pen.  No  : 
but  I  immediately  trembled  with  horror,  restrained  my  emotions, 
abandoned  these  thoughts,  betook  myself  to  God,  and  invoked  the 
names  of  Jesus  and  Mary." 

AN    ADDITION   TO    SCHEMA   VIII. 

"  It  sometimes  happens  that  young  men  or  girls,  attired  in  a  some- 
what vain  manner,  and  addicted  to  pleasure  and  voluptuousness,  confess 
nothing  of  the  temptations  of  licentiousness,  by  which  however,  per- 
sons of  this  kind  are  wont  to  be  assailed.  These  the  confessor  will 
interrogate  prudently  and  by  a  roundabout  method  (as  St.  Thomas 
advises)  beginning  with  general  things  thus : 

Conf.  Do  not  indecent  thoughts  sometimes  occur  to  you?  If  the 
penitent  answers  affirmatively,  the  confessor  may  proceed  according 
to  the  schema ;  if  negatively,  perhaps  from  ignorance  of  the  wicked- 
ness, he  must  proceed  to  external  things  more  known  to  the  penitent 
in  this  mode :  Do  you  sometimes  visit  persons  of  the  other  sex  or 
parties  ?  Pen.  Yes.  Conf.  Are  immodest  words  or  remarks  some- 
times exchanged  at  such  places?  Pen.  It  is  so :  concerning"  »  *  * 
[kind  reader,  excuse  me  I  would  give  you  the  Latin,  that  you  might 
carry  it  to  some  holy  confessor  and  ask  him  to  put  it  into  good  Saxon 
for  you,  but  it  is  too  bad  to  offer  even  in  the  original.] 

"  Conf.  What  part  did  you  take  ?  Pen.  I  laughed  with  others,  and 
sometimes  added  a  word.  Con.  How  often  did  this  happen  ?  This  is 
asked  that  the  number  of  sins,  which  is  in  the  actions,  may  be  known. 
Before  what  persons  ?  This  is  asked  because  it  destroys  so  many 
souls,  by  affording  them  so  many  scandals,  or  at  least  by  positively 
co-operating  with  them  in  laughing  and  speaking.  Conf.  Before  what 
kind  of  persons  ?  This  is  demanded  that  the  circumstances  of  tho 
scandals  may  be  exposed :  which  if  they  have  taken  place  with  a 


CONCERNING  PENANCE.  463 

person  bound  by  a  vow  will  be  sacrilege ;  if  with  a  married  one, 
injustice  :  because  he  himself  becomes  guilty  of  those  sins  to  which 
they  might  be  induced  on  account  of  the  scandals. 

CoNF.  Did  any  desires,  carnalities,  or  improper  liberties,  kisses,  &c. 
follow  ?  These  things  are  asked,  because  they  are  frequently  con- 
nected with  the  preceding  sins.  Children  are  usually  asked  in  this 
matter :  whether  they  have  played  indecent  games  with  themselves, 
or  with  others  ?  &,c. 

IX.         • 

EXAMINATION  CONCERNING  DISTRACTIONS  IN  PRAYER. 
"  Pen.  I  confessed  a  month  ago.  Conf.  Very  well :  what  has  hap- 
pened meanwhile?  Pen.  I  have  often  been  distracted  in  prayer. 
CoNF.  Were  these  distractions  directly  voluntary,  or  indirectly,  by 
affording  an  occasion  or  cause  ?  Pen.  I  gave  occasion  by  staring 
about.  CoNF.  In  the  prayer  of  obligation  ?  Pen.  Once  in  the  mass 
of  obligation  on  the  Lord's  day.  Conf.  How  long  did  this  distraction 
last  ?  Pen.  Through  half  the  time  of  the  mass.  Conf.  Did  you  not 
certainly  endeavour  to  attend  to  the  principal  parts  of  the  mass,  viz. 
to  the  offeftory,  consecration,  and  reception  ?  Or  did  you  not  endeavour 
to  break  off  the  distraction,  and  how  often  ?  Pen.  Two  or  three  times 
in  a  lukewarm  manner,  but  not  efficaciously  enough.  Conf.  Did  you 
hear  another  mass  on  that  day  ?  Pen.  No  :  because  it  was  the  last 
mass.  Conf.  Are  you  therefore  in  the  habit  of  being  negligent  in 
prayer  and  in  divine  service,  and  in  attending  preaching  ?  Pen.  No: 
but  this  happened  only  once ;  otherwise,  I  always  frequent  preaching 
in  my  parish,  and  I  endeavour  to  fulfil  the  obligations  of  my  station. 
Conf.  Does  nothing  else  oppress  your  conscience?  Pen.  Nothing". 
Conf.  You  ought  to  avoid  those  places  and  causes  of  distractions  in 
the  temple.  Pen.  I  will  do  so.  Conf.  Therefore  you  are  sorry  that 
you  have  offended  God  whom  you  love  above  all  things,  and  you  are 
resolved  not  to  sin  in  future?  Pen.  I  am  sorry.  Conf.  You  must 
elicit  an  act  of  contrition.  Afterwards  at  the  time  when  the  penitent 
renews  the  contrition,  the  confessor  says  :  may  Almighty  God  have 
mercy,  «&c.  Do  you  accuse  yourself  of  all  those  things  inasmuch  as 
you  are  guilty  before  God?  Pen.  Yes.  Conf.  For  sacramental 
penance  at  a  proper  time,  you  will  hear  mass,  and  give  to  the  poor 
one  farthing.  These  things  being  done,  he  absolves  the  penitent 
sacramentally." 


464  CONCERNING  PENANCE. 

X. 

THE  EXAMINATION  OF  LABOURERS. 

Pen.  Confessors  are  in  the  habit  of  putting-  questions  to  me.  Conf. 
My  friend,  have  you  not  examined  your  conscience  ?  Pen.  Yes :  but 
I  recollect  better,  when  I  am  questioned.  Conf.  Have  you  regularly 
and  honestly  confessed  at  other  times  ?  Have  you  omitted  something 
about  which  you  were  perhaps  not  asked  ?  Pen.  I  never  knowingly 
have  omitted  any  thing.*  Conf.  How  long  is  it  since  you  have  con- 
fessed? Pen.  Three  months.  Conf.  Of  what  state,  condition,  or 
trade  are  you  ?  Pen.  I  am  a  stone  cutter  and  unmarried.  Conf. 
When  you  work  for  daily  wages,  do  you  perform  the  proper  labour  ? 
Do  you  not  sometimes  spend  time  idly  ?  Pen.  Sometimes,  in  talking. 
Conf.  How  often,  and  how  long  a  time  have  you  thus  spent  ?  Pen. 
Nearly  every  day,  four  or  five  times,  so  that  daily,  this  time  put  to- 
gether may  amount  to  an  hour,  one  day  more,  another  less.  Conf. 
How  much  wages  do  you  earn  every  day  ?  Pen.  One  florin.  Conf. 
Therefore,  every  day  you  have  committed  injustice  to  the  amount  of 
about  two  stivers  ?  Pen.  So  it  is.  Conf.  Have  you  laboured  thus 
daily  for  others  for  day  wages  ?  Pen.  Yes,  on  every  week  day  now  for 
three  years.  Conf.  Have  you  been  the  cause  that  other  labourers 
have  also  neglected  their  time  like  yourself?  Pen.  Yes  ;  and  this 
with  respect  to  two  ;  for  I  am  in  the  habit  of  relating  some  new  or 
ridiculous  things,  the  others  whilst  listening  desist  from  work.  Conf. 
Do  you  know  that  you  have  sinned  in  the  way  of  scandal  by  giving 
them  occasion  of  sinning  ?  Besides  that  you  have  sinned  against 
justice,  and  that  you  are  bound  to  make  restitution  or  compensation 
by  other  works  according  to  the  proportion  of  the  time  neglected  ? 
Moreover  you  ought  to  admonish  your  other  associates  :  if,  however, 
they  neglect  to  make  restitution,  you  are  bound  to  do  it.  Pen.  It  is 
true ;  I  have  sometimes  been  reproved  by  the  master  for  it.  Conf. 
Did  this  same  thing  happen  before  the  last  confession  ?  Pen.  Yes. 
Conf.  Did  you  confess  it  ?  Pen.  No,  because  the  confessors  did  not 
ask  me  about  it.  Conf.  For  how  long  a  time  have  you  remained  in 
this  state  ?  Pen.  Now  for  three  years.  Conf.  Friend,  through  all 
this  time,  you  have  been  in  continual  sin,  and  your  confessions  have 
been  invalid ;  for  which  reason  you  ought  to  institute  a  general  con- 
fession of  this  time.  How  often  in  this  time  have  you  made  confes- 
sion, and  communed  ?  Pen.  Three  times  in  the  year.  Conf.  So 
often  you  have  received  the  sacraments  unworthily ;  therefore,  examine 
your  conscience  more  rigidly  concerning  other  sins  with  which  you 


i 


CONCERNING  PENANCE.  465 

are  probably  burdened,  and  accuse  yourself  of  them  all,  as  well  as 
of  the  omission  of  acts  of  the  supernatural  precepts  of  charity,  contri- 
tion, and  of  annual  confession  and  communion.  You  will  return  eight 
days  hence,  meanwhile  amend  your  ways,  and  pray  to  God  daily. 
You  will  also  admonish  the  others  about  making  restitution." 

XL 

EXAMINATION  OP  A  GENTEEL  MAN. 
"  CoNF.  i^re  you  in  the  habit  of  attending  preaching,  and  of  some- 
times reading  spiritual  books  ?  Pen.  No.  Conf.  Do  you  remember 
the  mystery,  which  we  call  to  mind  at  this  time  of  Easter  ?  Pen.  I 
do  not  remember.  Conf.  What  mystery  is  fulfilled  in  Christ  on  the 
first  day  of  Easter,  after  his  passion  ?  Pen.  That  I  do  not  know. 
Conf.  What  do  you  believe  concerning  Christ :  how  was  he  born,  how 
did  he  die,  and  where  is  he  now  ?  Pen.  He  was  born  of  Mary,  and 
was  crucified.  Conf.  How  many  natures  has  Christ  ?  Pen.  I  do  not 
know.  Conf.  Is  Christ  God  and  man  at  the  same  time  ?  Pen.  Yes, 
so  it  is.  Conf.  How  many  divine  Persons  are  there  ?  Pen.  Only 
one,  because  there  is  only  one  God.  Conf.  Do  you  not  therefore  be- 
lieve the  mystery  of  the  Most  Holy  Trinity  ?  In  what  does  it  consist  ? 
Pen.  Children  know  these  things ;  I  have  forgotten  them.  Conf.  My 
dear  sir,  children  learn  these  things  because  they  are  indispensable  to 
salvation,  through  the  necessity  of  means ;  and  unless  you  explicitly 
believe  these  things,  you  cannot  be  saved,  although  you  might .  be  in- 
vincibly ignorant  of  them  ;  but  you,  an  intelligent  man,  are  culpably 
ignorant  of  these  things !  From  what  time  have  you  begun  to  live 
thus  negligently  ?  Pen.  From  my  twentieth  year  ;  for  ten  years  until 
the  present  time.  Conf.  It  is  necessary  that  you  institute  a  general 
confession  from  the  twentieth  year  of  your  age  :  for  during  this  whole 
time  you  have  been  in  a  state  of  mortal  sin,  and  the  confessions  you 
have  instituted  are  invalid  ;  neither  have  you  fulfilled  the  precepts  of 
annual  confession  and  communion ;  but  before  you  can  be  absolved,  it 
first  behooves  you  to  learn  the  rudiments  of  the  faith,  which  must  be 
believed  through  the  necessity  of  means.  For  which  purpose,  you 
must  buy  a  Mechlin  catechism,  and  in  it  you  will  daily  read  four  les- 
sons, and  you  will  return  after  eight  days." 

Examination  of  one  of  the  common  people. 
"  Conf.  Are  you  in  the  habit  of  attending  preaching,  and  of  some- 
times reading  spiritual  books?     Pen.  No.    Conf.   Why  not?     Pen. 
Because  I  am  a  servant ;  time  is  not  given  me  for  attending  preach- 
39* 


466  CONCERNING  PENANCE. 

ing,  and  I  do  not  know  how  to  read.  Conf.  How  many  Gods  are 
there  ?  Pen.  There  is  one  God.  Conp.  How  many  divine  Persons 
are  there  ?  Pen.  Three,  viz.,  God  the  Father,  God  the  Son,  God  the 
Holy  Ghost.  Conf.  Which  person  of  them  became  incarnate,  and 
suifcred  for  us  the  death  of  the  cross?  Pen.  The  Second  Person,  who 
is  called  Jesus  Christ.  Conf.  What  reward  will  the  good  receive  after 
this  life,  and  what  the  bad  ?  Pen.  God  will  give  the  eternal  life  of 
the  kingdom  of  heaven  to  the  good  ;  but  the  wicked  will  be  sent  into 
hell.  Conf.  Why  do  you  believe  all  these  things  ?  Pen.  That  I  may 
be  saved.  Conf.  I  do  not  ask  the  final,  but  the  formal  reason  of  your 
faith  ;  namely,  why  do  you  believe  these  things  to  be  true  ?  Pen.  Be- 
cause our  pastor  has  taught  me  so.  Conf.  Whence  does  your  pastor 
know  that  these  things  are  true  ?  Pen.  From  his  books,  for  he  has 
a  great  many.  Conf.  But  whence  have  those  books,  or  the  writers, 
learned  these  mysteries  ?  Have  they  fabricated  them  ?  Pen.  They 
have  had  them  from  ancient  time,  from  the  Church.  Conf.  Who 
manifested  and  revealed  them  to  the  Church?  Pen.  God.  Conf. 
Why  do  you  believe  God,  who  reveals  ?  Pen.  Because  he  is  the 
highest  and  eternal  truth.  Conf.  How  many  and  what  are  the  sacra- 
ments in  the  Catholic  Church  ?  Pen.  They  are  baptism,  the  Eucha- 
rist, and  confession  ;  the  rest  I  do  not  know.  Conf.  Do  you  know, 
and  do  you  sometimes  recite  Pater  noster,  Ave  Maria,  Credo,  &c.  ? 
Pen.  I  recite  daily,  just  as  I  have  learned.  Conf.  Leave  that  family, 
unless  they  concede  to  you  time  for  learning  those  things  which  it  be- 
comes a  Christian  man  to  know.  Besides,  do  you  resolve  to  learn  the 
other  things  which  ought  to  be  known  as  soon  as  possible,  and  will 
you  bestow  greater  care  on  the  salvation  of  your  soul,  Eh  ?  Pen.  I 
will  do  so.  Conf.  Proceed  in  the  confession  of  your  sins,  that  you 
may  bo  absolved." 

NOTES    UPON    SCHEMA    XI. 

"  Therefore  those  who  are  ignorant  of  the  mysteries,  which  ought  to 
be  believed  by  necessity  of  means,  cannot  be  absolved  so  long  as  they 
labour  under  this  ignorance  :  whether  this  is  vincible,  or  invincible ; 
and  all  confessions  made  in  such  ignorance,  are  invalid,  and  ought  to 
be  repeated,  because  without  faith  it  is  impossible  to  please  God. 
Heb.  xi. 

"  Blameless  ignorance  of  other  articles  of  the  faith  does  not  render 
them  invalid ;  but  if  it  has  been  mortally  bad,  they  have  been  invalid 
and  sacrilegious  at  the  same  time,  on  account  of  the  defect  of  contri- 
tion, which  cannot  consist  together  with  negligence  that  is  mortally 


CONCERNING  PENANCE.  467 

bad,  or  with  actual  mortal  sin.  But  lest  an  occasion  for  pretended  in- 
dignation should  be  afforded  to  some,  especially  the  more  genteel,  if 
the  examination  should  be  begun  from  common  things,  the  following 
course  may  be  taken  with  them. 

"  CoNF.  Through  whoso  merits  do  you  hope  for  the  remission  of 
sins?  If  the  penitent  replies  aptly,  v.  g.,  if  he  says :  through  the 
merits  of  Jesus  Christ,  the  Son  of  God,  offered  on  the  altar  of  the  cross, 
that  he  might  satisfy  for  us  sinners  ;  you  know  the  lion  by  his  claw, 
and  that  he  is  sufficiently  instructed ;  but  if  he  cannot  reply,  you  will 
descend  to  less  things,  as  above.  However  an  examination  would  be 
made  foolishly  in  this  manner  :  Do  you  believe  that  there  is  one  God? 
Threefold  in  Persons  ?  Do  you  believe  that  the  Second  Person  be- 
came incarnate  for  us  ?  &c. ;  because  the  very  thing  which  must  be 
answered  is  manifest,  and  thus  the  question  is  rendered  useless." 

COROLLARY. 

Of  interrogatories. 
From  the  Roman  ritual,  and  the  Mechlin  pastorale,  the  following 
ought  ordinarily  to  be  made.  1.  How  long  it  is  since  the  penitent  has 
confessed.  2.  Of  what  condition  he  is,  in  order  that  he  may  be  inter- 
rogated concerning  the  sins  which  are  usually  committed  in  that  con- 
dition. 3.  Whether  he  has  fulfilled  the  imposed  penance.  4.  Whether 
he  has  regularly  and  honestly  confessed  at  other  times.  5.  Whether 
he  has  first  diligently  examined  his  conscience  as  he  ought.  6. 
Whether  he  has  learned  the  rudiments  of  the  faith,  and  other  things 
necessary  to  be  known,  7.  If  the  penitent  has  not  mentioned  the 
number,  and  kinds,  and  circumstances  of  the  sins  necessary  to  be  ex- 
plained, let  the  priest  prudently  interrogate  him." 

Of  denying  absolution. 
"  In  the  same  place  also  they  are  mentioned  to  whom  absolution  is 
to -be  denied  on  account  of  the  defect  of  the  proper  disposition,  namely  • 
1.  Who  give  no  signs  of  sorrow,  or  not  sufficient.  2.  Who  will  not 
lay  aside  their  animosities  and  enmities.  3.  Who  will  not  restore  an- 
other's property,  if  they  are  able.  4.  Who  will  not  leave  the  proximate 
occasion  of  sinning.  5.  Who  will  not  relinquish  sins  in  any  other 
way,  and  amend  their  life  for  the  better.  6.  Who  have  given  public 
scandal,  unless  they  publicly  make  satisfaction,  and  remove  the  scandal. 
To  these  the  Lovanians  add  such  as  are  ignorant  of  the  articles  of  the 
faith  ;  but  this  cause  the  rituals  mention  afterwards.  Yet  it  is  to  be 
observed  that  in  a  sin,  the  following  things  may  concur,  and  ought  to 


4G8  CONCERNING  FENANCE. 

be  exposed :  1.  Of  what  kind  the  external,  and  of  what  kind  the  in- 
ternal act  is ;  and  of  what  kind  that  was  which  was  voluntary.  2.  The 
kind  of  sin  with  the  expression  of  the  particular  object  or  individual. 

3.  The  number  of  acts  and  objects :  the  habit  and  proximate  occasion 
of  sinning.  Then  the  circumstances  :  1.  Who^  the  quality  or  condi- 
tion of  the  person  acting.  2.  What,  the  quality  of  the  object,  the 
quantity  of  the  action,  and  the  accidental  effects  of  loss,  scandal,  dan- 
ger, &c.     3.   Where,  the  quality  of  the  place,  namely,  sacred  or  public. 

4.  With  what  aids,  the  instruments,  means,  companions.  5.  Why, 
the  aim  and  intention  of  the  acting  person.  6.  How,  ignorance,  pas- 
sion, earnestness,  contempt,  command,  counsel,  consent,  &c.  7. 
When,  the  quality  and  quantity  of  the  time,  or,  the  extraordinary  dura- 
tion of  the  sin :  also  the  duration  of  the  desire  towards  the  sin,  tefore 
and  after  it" 

The  minister  of  the  sacrament  of  penance,  is  the 
priest  only,  wiio  has  jurisdiction  over  the  penitent;  the 
choice  of  a  confessor  is  a  highly  important  matter ;  it  is  not 
lawful  to  confess  to  a  deacon  or  layman.  The  power  of 
giving  absolution,  belongs  to  the  priest  by  virtue  of  his  ordi- 
nation, through  these  words:  Receive  the  Holy  Ghost,  whose 
sins  ye  shall  forgive,  &c.  There  is  no  reservation  in  the 
article  of  death,  and  thus  all  priests  may  absolve  any  peni- 
tents whatsoever,  from  any  sins  and  censures ;  and  in  such 
a  case,  every  priest  is  bound  to  absolve  from  an  obligation 
of  charity.  Even  an  excommunicated  priest  has  this  autho- 
rity, according  to  the  common  opinion  of  the  Church. 

The  article  of  death  is  understood,  as  signifying  not  only 
the  time  of  the  death  agony,  but  "  such  a  danger  of  death, 
that  unless  he  confesses  to  this  priest  not  approved,  some 
danger  may  threaten,  that  perhaps  he  may  never  have  an 
opportunity  of  confessing,  or  at  least  of  confessing  entirely 
to  one  who  is  approved ;  v.  g.,  if  it  may  be  apprehended 
that  the  sick  man  will  perhaps  lose  his  sense  or  speech, 
before  an  approved  priest  who  has  been  sent  for,  can  arrive." 
The  qualities  requisite  in  the  confessor,  are  these  three: 
goodness,  knowledge,  and  prudence.  He  ought  to  have 
such  a  knowledge  of  theology,  as  to  be  acquainted  with  the 
common  principles,  and  he  should  be  able  to  resolve  com- 
mon cases ;  but  if  he  does  not  possess  proper  knowledge, 
his  absolution  is  still  valid  ;  unless  it  should  become  invalid, 


CONCERNING  PENANCE.  469 

through  the  wrong  disposition  of  the  penitent,  who  knowing 
the  confessor's  want  of  skill,  chooses  him  in  order  to  escape 
the  proper  judgment  for  his  sins.  In  order  to  be  able  to 
apply  speciar remedies,  the  confessor  must  always  ascertain 
the  root  of  the  disease.     (Nos.  99-113.) 

OF  THE  SEAL  OF  CONFESSION.       (No.  159.) 

The  seal  of  sacramental  confession,  is  the  obligation  of 
concealincr  those  thintrs  which  are  learned  from  sacramental 
confession.  This  contains  the  mystic  signification  that  God 
forgives  sins  and  blots  them  out,  as  if  he  did  not  remember 
them.  The  sacramental  seal  is  obligatory  from  positive 
divine  commmand;  from  natural  right,  which  enjoins,  that 
secrets  be  preserved ;  and  from  ecclesiastical  law,  which  is 
to  this  effect :  "  But  let  the  priest  beware,  that  he  do  not  by 
any  means,  betray  the'  sinner,  by  word  or  sign,  or  by  any 
other  mode ;  but  if  he  is  in  want  of  prudent  counsel,  let  him 
cautiously  inquire,  without  any  mention  of  the  person;  since 
we  decree,  that  he  who  shall  presume  to  reveal  a  sin  detected 
by  him  in  penitential  judgment,  shall  not  only  be  deposed 
from  the  priestly  office,  but  shall  also  be  thrust  into  a  closed 
monastery,  to  perform  perpetual  penance." 

THE  VIOLATION  OF  THE  SACRAMENTAL  SEAL 
is  a  sin  of  sacrilege  against  the  virtue  of  religion :  also  a 
sin  of  unfaithfulness  against  a  neighbour :  because  a  secret 
committed  to  another,  is  obligatory  from  fidelity.  This 
treachery  is  a  mortal  sin,  no  matter  how  small  the  affair 
itself  may  be.  No  circumstances  can  justify  the  disclosure 
of  any  thing  learned  at  the  confessional ;  "  ALTHOUGH 
THE  LIFE  OR  SALVATION  OF  A  MAN,  OR  THE 
RUIN  OF  THE  STATE  SHOULD  DEPEND  UPON 
IT;  NOR  CAN  THE  POPE  GIVE  ANY  DISPENSA- 
TION IN  THIS  CASE;  SO  THAT  THIS  SECRET 
OF  THE  SEAL,  IS  TPIEREFORE  MORE  BINDING, 
THAN  THE  OBLIGATION  OF  AN- OATH,  VOW, 
NATURAL  SECRET,  &c. ;  and  this  from  the  positive 
will  of  God. 

"  What,  therefore,  must  a  confessor  reply,  who  is  asked 
concerning  the  truth,  ivhich  he  has  learned  through  sacra- 
mental confession  alone  ? 

"  HE  MUST  REPLY  THAT  HE  DOES  NOT  KNOW 


470  CONCERNING  PENANCE. 

IT,  AND  IF  IT  IS  NECESSARY,  HE  MUST  CON- 
FIRM  THE  SAME  WITH  AN  OATH. 

"  Obj.  In  no  case  is  it  lawful  to  lie :  but  this  confessor 
would  lie,  because  he  knows  the  truth  ;  therefore,  &c. 

"Ans.  I  deny  the  minor;  because  such  a  confessor  is 
interrogated  as  a  man,  and  answers  as  a  man :  BUT  NOW 
HE  DOES  NOT  KNOW  THIS  TRUTH  AS  A  MAN, 
ALTHOUGH  HE  MAY  KNOW  IT  AS  GOD,  says  St. 
Thorn.,  &c. ;  and  this  sense  is  naturally  in  the  answer :  for 
when  he  is  questioned  or  replies  out  of  confession,  he  is  con- 
sidered as  a  man, 

"  What  if  it  be  directly  asked  from  the  confessor,  whe- 
ther he  knows  this  through  sacramental  confession  ? 

"  Ans.  In  this  case  he  need  answer  nothing ;  so  Steyaert 
with  Sylvius ;  but  the  question  is  to  be  rejected  as  impious : 
or  also,  he  might  say  absolutely,  not  relatively  to  the  ques- 
ton:  I  know  nothing:  because  the  word  /,  restricts  to  human 
knowledge. 

"  LIKEWISE,  IF  A  CONFESSOR  BE  CITED  IN  A 
JUDICIAL  CASE,  THAT  HE  MAY  GIVE  HIS  REA- 
SON FOR  REFUSING  ABSOLUTION;  HE  MUST 
PROTEST  THAT  IN  THIS  CASE,  HE  ACKNOW- 
LEDGES  NO  SUPERIOR,  EXCEPT  GOD.  What  will 
the  confessor  reply,  who  is  asked  whether  he  has  absolved 
such  a  one  1  He  will  reply  that  he  has  fulfilled  his  duty. 
He  might  sometimes  testify  that  he  has  absolved  him,  if  from 
it  suspicion  would  not  follow,  that  any  other  person,  to  whom 
the  relation  is  made,  had  been  dismissed  without  absolution. 

"  Observe  that  the  seal  of  confession  does  not  hinder  the 
use  of  human  knowledge'received  from  another  source :  thus 
the  confessor,  if  he  has  seen  or  heard,  that  certain  faults 
have  been  committed  by  those  whose  confessions  he  has 
received,  might  speak  of  those  faults,  in  so  far  as  he  has 
heard  or  seen  them,  adding  nothing  of  the  knowledge 
obtained  in  confession;  and  for  this  reason,  he  will  pru- 
dently add  the  cause  of  this  human  knowledge,  by  saying, 
I  have  heard,  I  have  seen,  &c. :  if  any  things  are  related, 
which  he  knows  from  the  mere  knowledge  of  confession  to 
be  false,  he  ought  not  on  this  account  to  argue  that  they  are 
false."     (No.  160.) 

This  duty  of  secresy,  obtains,  in  respect  to  every  sacra- 


CONCERNING  PENANCE.  471 

mental  confession ;  and  it  is  sufficient,  that  it  is  sacramental 
in  the  intention  of  the  party  confessing.     (No.  161.) 

A  confessor  who  relates  what  he  has  heard  in  confession, 
but  in  such  a  way,  that  the  person  confessing,  cannot  be 
ascertained,  and  that  no  prejudice  can  result  from  it  to  the 
penitent,  does  not  violate  the  seal.  But  confessors  are  admo- 
nished to  abstain  from  such  narrations,  except  for  the  sake 
of  asking  counsel.  "  A  priest  does  not  violate  sacramental 
secresy,  by  saying,  This  man  has  confessed  to  me :  nor  by 
declaring,  I  have  absolved  this  man ;  unless  suspicion  might, 
in  that  case,  arise  from  it,  that  some  one  else  had  not  been 
absolved.  To  say,  I  have  not  absolved  this  man,  is  more 
odious,  because  it  usually  denotes  his  want  of  disposition. 
What  kind  of  a  certificate  will  a  confessor  write,  concern- 
ing the  confession  of  him  whom  he  does  not  absolve  7  One 
of  this  kind : 

"  I,  the  undersigned,  declare  that  John  N has  sacra- 

mentally  confessed  to  me,  this day  of month, 

1794.     N.  N.,  confessor  in  the  Metrop.  Church, 

S.  Rum.  Mechl." 

*'It  is  proper,  however,  always  to  write  this  certificate 
under  the  same  form,  even  when  absolution  has  been  denied 
or  delayed ;  because  it  is  true,  that  he  has  sacramentally 
confessed.  It  is  also  safer  not  to  mention  that  absolution  has 
been  giv-en,  in  order  that  when  it  is  not  added,  no  suspicion 
may  arise  that  absolution  has  been  denied."     (No.  163.) 

All  those  to  whom  the  knowledge  of  any  thing  said  in 
confession  comes,  whether  mediately  or  immediately,  law- 
fully or  unlawfully,  are  bound  by  the  sacramental  seal  to 
keep  it  secret.     (No.  165.) 

If  permission  to  reveal  the  secret  is  obtained  from  the 
penitent,  v.  g.,  if  the  penitent  says;  "those  things  which  I 
have  confessed,  I  tell  you  out  of  the  confession ;"  then  the 
priest  knowing  it  as  a  man,  may  mention  it,  only  let  there 
be  no  scandal.  Without  the  permission  of  the  penitent,  it 
is  not  lawful  for  a  priest  to  speak  out  of  the  confession,  to 
the  individual,  about  the  sins  which  he  has  confessed.  He 
may  speak  of  them  to  the  penitent  after  he  has  given  abso- 
lution, and  so  long  as  they  are  in  the  confessional.  (No.  166.) 

Neither  is  it  lawful  to  make  any  use  of  the  knowledge 
acquired  from  confession,  when  there  is  danger  that  some- 


472  CONCERNING  PENANCE. 

•I 

thing  would  be  directly  or  indirectly  revealed,  concerning 
the  confession.  "  Thus  Clement  XVIII.  prohibited  the  use 
of  the  knowledge  of  confession  for  external  government, 
May  26,  A.  D.  1594,  in  these  words :  As  well  superiors,  as 
confessors,  who  have  subsequently  been  promoted  to  the 
rank  of  superior,  must  most  carefully  beware,  lest  they  make 
use  of  that  knowledge  of  the  sins  of  others,  which  they  have 
obtained  in  confession,  for  external  government."  Hence 
an  abbot  may  not  depose  the  prior  of  a  monastery,  whom 
he  knows  to  be  unworthy  from  confession  alone.  "  The 
knowledge  obtained  from  confession,  may  be  used  when  the 
sinner  is  no  way  exposed,  when  no  injury  results  either  to 
himself  or  another ;  and  in  short,  when  nothing  intervenes 
which  renders  the  confession  odious.  Thus  it  is  lawful  for 
a  confessor  to  pray  for  the  penitent,  it  is  proper  for  him  to 
consult  books  and  more  learned  men,  also  to  observe  certain 
things,  which,  under  another  head,  he  is  bound  to  observe  : 
V.  g.,  a  confessor  understanding  from  confessions,  that  he 
speaks  in  too  loud  a  voice,  that  he  is  negligent  in  his  duty, 
in  visiting  the  sick,  &c.,  might  amend  those  defects.  In 
those  things  which  the  penitent  considers  favourable  to  him- 
self, the  use  of  the  knowledge  of  confession,  is  not  thought 
so  much  to  violate  the  seal,  as  on  account  of  that  part  by 
which  the  confession  might  be  rendered  odious.  Likewise, 
if  through  confession,  he  knows  that  heresies  are  scattered 
in  his  parish,  that  certain  vices  and  sins  are  skulking  about, 
he  may  by  general  instructions  and  admonitions,  fortify  the 
faithful  against  such  sins:  so  as  it  does  not  betray  the 
person."     (No.  170.) 

A  priest  if  asked  to  administer  sacraments  to  a  sick  man, 
whom  he  knows  to  be  unworthy,  from  mere  knowledge 
obtained  in  confession,  must  administer  the  last  sacraments 
of  the  holy  Viaticum,  and  extreme  unction. 

"  What  must  he  done  by  a  confessor,  who  hears  the  con- 
fession  of  a  girl,  who  is  pregnant,  and  near  to  death, 
which  thing  is  unknown  to  all  ?  He  ought  to  induce  her  to 
declare  her  pregnancy  to  some  one  out  of  the  confession;  in 
order  that,  if  she  should  perhaps  die,  the  foetus  may  be  bap- 
tized ;  if  she  refuses,  she  is  not  to  be  absolved ;  however,  the 
confessor,  without  leave  of  the  penitent,  may  not  reveal  this 
k)  any  one,  although  the  foetus  should  perish  without  baptism. 


CONCERNING  PENANCE.  473 

"  What  shall  the  confessor  do,  who  from  confession  alone 
has  understood  that  poisoned  wine  loill  he  offered  him  to 
drink,  in  the  celebration  cf  the  mass  ?  Such  a  confession 
will  often  be  not  sacramental,  because  it  is  not  made  with  the 
intention  of  the  sacrament,  but  with  a  spirit  of  unjust  menac- 
ing :  and  the  confessor  might  immediately  reply  to  such  a 
person  confessing,  that  he  does  not  receive  this  declaration 
as  a  sacramental  confession.  But  if  it  be  supposed  sacra- 
mental, (which  it  might  more  readily  be,  if  the  evil  was 
threatened  by  another  than  the  person  confessing,)  and  the 
person  confessing  will  in  no  way  consent  to  the  use  of  the 
knowledge  of  the  confession :  Neesen  and  Pauwels  resolve 
that  the  confessor  may  not  omit  the  celebration  of  the  mass, 
if  other  causes  of  omitting  do  not  occur :  for  this  makes  very 
much  for  the  reverence  of  the  sacrament,  and  at  the  same 
time  for  the  increase  among  all  of  the  security  of  the  seal : 
so  that  in  this  case  it  would  be  necessary  to  trust  to  Divine 
Providence.  And  this  must  be  indubitably  maintained,  if 
from  the  omission  of  mass  the  person  of  the  one  committing 
the  crime,  or  the  person  of  the  penitent  would  be  revealed, 
or  any  difficulty  happen  to  them. 

"  Sylvius,  Conink,  and  others  teach,  that  the  confessor  may 
lawfully  omit  the  mass,  having  feigned  some  other  cause- 
And  this  resolution  seems  plausible  enough  in  a  case  in  which 
no  one,  not  even  the  penitent,  can  observe  that  the  confessor 
omits  mass  from  the  knowledge  of  the  confession  :  because 
no  revelation  of  the  confession  is  made,  nor  is  any  difficulty 
created  for  any  one,  nor  any  odium  on  the  sacrament :  in- 
deed some  suppose,  that  the  confessor  in  Jthis  case  would  be 
bound  to  abstain  from  the  celebration  of  the  mass,  in  order 
to  hinder  evil  results." 

So  much  for  the  priests'  belief  in  their  own  doctrine  of 
transubstantiation  !  No  better  evidence  could  be  desired  to 
prove  that  they  know  full  well  that  the  bread  and  wine  are 
not  changed  into  the  body  and  blood,  soul  and  divinity  of 
Jesus  Christ.  Few  Papists  have  any  ambition  to  suffer  mar- 
tyrdom for  the  sake  of  transubstantiation  !  Let  the  priest 
find  out  that  there  is  any  foul  play  about  the  wafer,  or  the 
wine,  and  he  is  not  quite  such  a  fool  as  to  put  the  virtue  of 
40 


474  CONCERNING  PENANCE. 

his  potent  charm,  "  hoc  est  corpus  meum,"  to  a  practical 
test.  No,  no  :  he  would  smile  as  sweetly  as  innocence  itself, 
put  the  poison  into  the  sacred  sink,  with  the  proper  inten- 
tion too,  and   mutter,  very  complacently,  "  distingue,  dis- 


"  According  to  the  aforesaid  doctrine  the  following  cases 
may  be  resolved  :  whether  a  confessor  may  desist  from  a 
journey  in  which  he  has  learned  from  confession  alone  that 
he  is  to  be  killed  ;  whether  a  confessor  may  dismiss  a  ser- 
vant, whom  he  knows  to  be  a  thief,  from  her  confession 
alone."     (No.  171.) 

OF  SATISFACTION    FOR   SINS    IN    GENERAL.     (No.  172.) 

"  What  is  satisfaction  ?  It  is  the  voluntary  endurance 
of  punishment,  in  order  to  make  amends  for  an  injury  offered 
to  God.  It  is  called  voluntary,  through,  the  acceptance  of  the 
will. 

"  Obj.  By  the  affliction  of  diseases  we  can  satisfy,  but 
they  are  not  voluntary ;  therefore,  &c. 

" -JLns.  I  deny  the  inference  :  because  to  endure  patiently 
and  penitentially,  is  voluntary  :  but  we  then  satisfy  by  their 
voluntary  endurance,  not  only  on  account  of  the  internal  act, 
but  also  through  the  external  or  real  suffering  accepted  by 
us."  To  the  heretical  objection  that  Christ  has  fully  satis- 
fied for  our  sins,  and  that  therefore  our  works  of  satisfaction 
are  useless,  the  reply  is  made,  that  his  satisfaction  must  be 
applied  by  us  in  such  a  way  as  to  profit  us  :  and  to  this  pur- 
pose our  satisfactions  tend,  and  are  therefore  not  superfluous. 
The  advantage  and  practice  of  satisfactory  works  is  proved 
by  the  examples  of  the  Ninevites,  of  David,  and  of  all  the 
saints  of  the  New  Testament.  The  doctrine  that  one  man 
may  satisfy  for  another,  is  founded  on  the  communion  of 
saints  ;  but  it  is  not  possible  that  one  should  fulfil  sacramental 
satisfaction  for  another.  "Hence  this  15th  proposition  was 
condemned  by  Alex.  VII.  A  penitent  may,  by  his  own  au- 
thority, substitute  for  himself  another,  who  may  fulfil  his 
penance  in  his  stead."  The  penitent  may  profitably  be  ad- 
monished to  seek  to  have  works  of  satisfaction  performed  for 
him  by  others,  but  these  works  done  by  others  are  not  a  part 
of  the  sacrament  J  but  the  act  of  the  penitent,  who  makes  pro- 


CONCERNING  PENANCE.  475 

vision  Cot  the  performance  of  these  works  for  himself,  is  a' 
part  of  the  sacrament.  Satisfaction  is  distinguished  as  sa- 
cramentalj  and  not  sacramental ;  'perfect  and  imperfect ; 
public  and  private  ;  satisfaction  in  punishment,  and  satis- 
faction FOR  punishment,  which  is  called  satisfaction,  or 
sufficient  suffering,  as  takes  place  in  purgatory.  (No.  172.) 

Sacramental  satisfaction  is  the  voluntary  endurance  of 
punishment  enjoined  by  the  confessor  for  the  compensation 
of  voluntary  injury  done  to  God.  This  satisfaction  is  com- 
monly called  Penance.  The  confessor  is  under  solemn 
obligation  to  impose  sacramental  satisfaction  whenever  he 
absolves.  Even  upon  sick  persons,  and  those  who  are  at  the 
point  of  death,  some  penance  must  be  imposed,  which  they 
must  endure  or  perform  immediately,  before  death,  lest  over- 
come by  the  disease,  they  should  forget  it.     (No.  173.) 

The  penitent  is  under  solemn  obligation  to  accept  any 
reasonable  penance  imposed  on  him  by  the  confessor ;  if  he 
deems  it  unreasonable,  he  may  decline  it,  and  absolution 
a.lso,  and  go  to  some  other  confessor.  It  is  a  sin  of  sacrilege 
to  omit  the  performance  of  a  penance  :  the  opinion  that  it  is 
only  a  venial  offence  to  neglect  the  penance  when  the  matter 
is  in  itself  a  trifle,  is  expressly  repudiated,  unless  a  small  and 
unimportant  part  of  the  penance  is  omitted,  in  which  case  it 
may  sometimes  be  a  venial  offence.  Satisfaction  is  imposed 
as  chastisement  for  past  sins ;  as  medicine  for  present  of- 
fences, and  as  a  preservative  against  future  transgressions. 
(No.  175.) 

Sacramental  satisfactions  ought  according  to  the  council 
of  Trent  to  be  salutary  and  convenient  according  to  the 
quality  of  the  crimes  and  the  ability  of  the  penitents.  All 
works  of  satisfaction  may  be  reduced  to  these  three  kinds, 
prayer,  fasting  and  alms-giving. 

"  Lest  a  confessor  who  is  a  novice  should  perhaps  hesi- 
tate, what  he  may  enjoin  as  satisfaction,  we  here  subjoin  the 
individual  works  of  satisfaction  now  practised  in  the  church, 
according  to  that  which  P.  Tombeur  et  P.  Bossuyt  observe. 
Thus  under  the  class  o(  prayers  the  following  may  be  en- 
joined once,  or  several  times,  or  for  several  days,  or  weeks : 

1.  "To  say  five  Pater  Noster,  and  Ave  Maria,  in 
memory  of  Christ's  five  wounds,  either  on  his  bended  knees, 
or  with  extended  arms,  or  before  a  crucifix. 


470  CONCERNING  PENANCE. 

2.  "  To  recite  the  rosary,  or  litanies  of  the  blessed  Virgin 
Mary,  or  of  the  Saints,  &c. 

3.  "  To  read  the  psalm  Miserere  (51st.?)  or  seven  peni- 
tential  psalms. 

4.  "  To  hear  masses,  or  lauds,  or  preaching.^ 

5.  "  To  read  a  chapter  in  Thomas  a  Kempis. 

6.  "  To  visit  the  churches  to  pray  before  the  tabernacle. 

7.  "  At  stated  times,  early,  at  evening,  or  through  the  day, 
or  as  often  as  they  hear  the  sound  of  the  bell,  to  repeat 
orally  or  in  the  heart,  ejaculatory  prayers,  acts  of  contri- 
tion, or  of  charity  :  v.  g.  I  love  thee,  O  God,  above  all  things  ; 
I  detest  all  my  sins  :  I  will  sin  no  more:  Jesus,  crucified 
for  me,  have  mercy  upon  me. 

8.  "  On  the  appointed  day  to  confess  again,  or  at  least  to 
return  to  the  confessor." 

To  the  class  oi" fasting  is  referred  every  thing  which  per- 
tains to  the  mortification  of  the  body  :  thus  either  a  perfect 
fast,  or  a  part  of  a  fast,  may  be  enjoined ;  v.  g; 

1.  "  Let  him  fast  on  the  sixth  day  of  the  week,  or  oftener. 

2.  "  Let  him  fast  only  till  twelve  o'clock. 

3.  "  Let  him  not  drink  before  noon,  or  after  noon,  except 
at  dinner,  or  supper,  although  he  may  be  thirsty  :  let  him 
abstain  from  wine  and  strong  beer. 

4.  "  Let  him  eat  lefes,  at  evening  let  him  take  only  half 
a  meal. 

"  The  above  mentioned  abstinences  are  properly  imposed 
on  workmen,  because  they  may  be  connected  with  labour, 
because  otherwise  they  are  wont  to  excuse  themselves  on 
account  of  their  work.  St.  Jerome  confirms  the  same,  when 
he  says  :  scanty  food,  and  a  stomach  ever  hungry,  is  better 
than  a  three  days'  fast. 

5.  "  Let  him  rise  out  of  bed  earlier :  let  him  kneel  more 
frequently  and  for  a  longer  time:  let  him  endure  cold:  at  'a 
certain  time  let  him  observe  silence :  let  him  abstain  from 
games  and  from  recreations,  &c. 

*'  To  the  class  of  alms  is  reduced  whatever  is  expended 
for  the  advantage  of  a  neighbour  :  v.  g. 

1.  *' To  make  presents  of  money,  clothes,  food,  &c. 

*  Let  no  one  suppose  that  this  is  a  small  penance.  I  once,  and  but 
once,  heard  a  priest  preach,  and  from  such  endurance  of  rhodomontade 
und  fustian  may  1  ever  be  delivered ! 


CONCERNING  PENANCE.  477 

2.  "  To  afford  personal  helps,  to  wait  upon  the  sick,  to 
pray  for  the  conversion  of  sinners,  &c.,  and  works  of  any 
other  nnercy,  whether  corporeal  or  spiritual."     (No.  176.) 

Of  the  amount  of  Satisfaction  to  be  imposed. 
(No.  179.) 

The  confessor  must  impose  so  much  penance  as  is  pro- 
portionate to  the  sins  and  to  the  persons :  in  order  that  by  it 
the  purposes  and  effects  above  prescribed  may  be  attained  ; 
council  of  Trent,  sess.  xiv.  c  8.  Lest  by  enjoining  certain 
very  light  works  for  very  serious  offences,  they  may  be- 
come partakers  of  the  sins  of  others.  In  a  doubtful  case 
it  is  more  safe  to  impose  a  less  penance  than  is  due,  than  to 
impose  a  greater :  because  such  defect  will  be  supplied  in 
purgatory.     (Comfortable,  very  !) 

"  What  penance  is  it  therefore  proper  to  impose  for 
mortal  sin,  v.  g.  for  voluntary  drunkenness  without  scan- 
dal ?  Ans.  That  he  read  on  two  days  with  bended  knees 
the  psalm  Miserere  :  [Have  mercy  upon  me,  d^c :)  that  he 
fast  twice  in  this  week :  and  that  he  distribute  to  the  poor, 
twice  as  much  as  he  consumed  in  drink. 

"  What  if  he  is  a  poor  man,  and  a  labourer  in  heavy 
work  ?  Ans.  For  three  days  in  succession  let  him  repeat 
five  Pater  et  Ave,  (our  Father  and  Hail  Mary,)  on  his 
bended  knees:  for  two  days  let  him  not  drink  before  noon, 
and  at  evening  lef  him  eat  only  half  a  meal  ;  on  the  two 
following  Lord's  days  let  him  not  enter  a  tavern :  but  in  the 
afternoon  let  him  walk  to  preaching  and  lauds.  Generally 
with  Steyaert  sect.  v.  &c.,  it  is  proper  to  appoint,  that  for 
some  mortal  sins,  neither  very  grievous,  nor  many,  a  pen- 
ance may  be  imposed  continuing  through  several  days, 
through  one  or  two  weeks,  or  until  the  next  confession.  It 
is  generally  expedient  that  a  previous  penance  should  be 
finished  with  the  following  confession,  lest  the  penances  of 
the  penitent  should  accumulate,  and  lest,  overwhelmed  by 
their  multitude,  he  should  forget  them,  or,  becoming  weary, 
negligently  omit  them.  For  many  and  serious  sins  especi- 
ally when  a  general  confession  of  a  vicious  life  is  instituted, 
a  penance  may  be  imposed  continuing  through  months,  half 
a  year,  or  a  whole  year,  or  longer;  and  in  this  case  ij;  is 
proper  that  the  penance  be  discontinued,  so  that  if  it  be  hin- 
40* 


478  CONCERNING  PENANCE. 

(lerod  by  one  work  it  may  be  supplied  by  another :  v.  g.  if 
on  some  day,  he  should  be  hindered  from  hearing  daily 
mass,  let  him  supply  it  by  alms  or  some  other  work,"  &c. 

It  is  therefore  not  expedient  to  impose  a  penance  of  seven 
years  for  adultery,  according  to  the  ancient  penitential  can- 
ons. S.  Carol.  Borr.  admonishes  confessors  that  they  enjoin 
heavy  and  difficult  penances  upon  blasphemers.    (No.  179.) 

The  following  causes  will  justify  the  occasional  applica- 
tion of  smaller  penances.  Inability,  arising  from  sickness, 
weakness,  labour,  &c.  Indulgences  earned  by  the  penitent  ; 
spii'itual  infirmity ;  and  the  pusillanimity  of  the  penitent, 
lest  he  be  too  much  dejected.  It  is  not  lawful  to  impose  a 
greater  penance  than  is  justly  due,  if  the  relation  be  made 
with  respect  to  all  the  three  purposes  of  penance ;  (viz.  as 
chastisement,  medicine,  and  as  a  preservative ;)  but  it  is 
lawful  if  done  with  reference  to  only  one  object.  Thus,  v. 
g.  rigid  restitution  is  imposed  upon  boys  at  first  for  slight 
theft,  and  a  severe  and  longer  penance  as  a  preservative  and 
restraint  against  relapse  ;  although  the  purpose  of  expiating 
the  temporal  punishment  would  not  require  so  great  a  one 
for  a  venial  sin.  From  this  it  appears,  how  sometimes  a 
severe  penance  may  be  imposed  for  venial  sin,  and  a  greater 
than  for  mortal  sin.     (No.  180.) 

The  most  convenient  time  of  enjoining  penance  is  before 
absolution.     (No.  181.) 

The  obligation  of  sacramental  satisfaction  ceases,  when 
the  sacrament  is  not  valid ;  when  the  penance  enjoined  is 
impossible ;  when  the  penitent  entirely  forgets  it ;  in  the 
latter  case  Suarez,  Neesen  and  others,  liberate  him  entirely 
on  account  of  inability  ;  but  others  maintain  that  he  is  bound 
to  perform  some  other  penance.     (No.  183.) 

The  confessor  may  change  the  sacramental  satisfaction 
for  something  else.     (No.  184.) 

Of  Canonical  Penance.     (No.  186.) 

"  Which  penance  is  called  canonical  ?  Ans.  That  which 
was  performed  according  to  the  canons,  or  laws,  or  statutes  of 
councils,  bishops,  or  churches ;  v.  g.,  wearing  a  sack  sprin- 
kled with  ashes,  standing  before  the  church  doors,  fasting  on 
bread  and  water,  &c.  The  penitential  canons  took  their 
origin  in  the  third  century,  on  occasion  of  the  heresy  of  the 


CONCERNING  INDULGENCES.  470 

Montanists  and  Novatians,  who  denied  penance:  at  which 
time  also,  the  four  grades  of  penitents  were  instituted  ;  the 
weeping,  the  hearing,  the  prostrate,  and  the  standing.  The 
observance  and  practice  of  these  penances,  sensibly  decHned 
from  the  ninth  century,  in  consequence  of  admitting  their 
redemption  by  ahns,  flagellations,  psalteries,  &c.  Subse- 
quently, still  more  on  the  occasion  of  the  Jerusalem  expedi- 
tion, for  the  recovery  of  the  Holy  Land.  Afterwards,  in 
the  twelfth  century,  and  finally  in  the  thirteenth,  the  obliga- 
tion ceased  through  the  use  of  indulgences ;  which  were 
granted  for  the  sake  of  munificent  alms,  or  some  other  work, 
from  which,  at  that  time,  magnificent  temples  were  con- 
structed and  built." 

These  canonical  penances  were  imposed  only  on  account 
of  the  more  enormous  sins ;  though,  sometimes  people 
assumed  them  without  obligation,  from  a  voluntary  humility. 
These  public  penances  pertained  to  the  external  discipline  of 
the  Church,  and  were  not  sacramental,  as  they  might  be 
remitted  by  a  deacon. 


CHAPTER  XL. 
Treatise  concerning  Indulgences. 

"  What  is  an  indulgence  ?  Ans.  It  is  the  remission  of 
temporal  punishment  due  to  sins  remitted  as  to  their  guilt, 
made  by  the  power  of  the  keys,  apart  from  the  sacrament, 
by  the  application  of  satisfactions  which  are  contained  in  the 
treasury  of  the  Church.  What  is  meant  by  the  treasury  of 
the  Church  ?  It  is  an  accumulation  of  spiritual  blessings 
remaining  in  divine  acceptance,  and  whose  disposition  is 
entrusted  to  the  Church. 

^^  From  what  does  this  treasury  coalesce?  It  coalesces 
primarily  from  the  superabundant  satisfaction  of  Christ,  then 
from  the  supereffluent  satisfactions  of  the  blessed  Virgin 
Mary,  and  the  other  saints.  This  treasury  is  the  foundation, 
or  the  matter  of  indulgences,  and  these  resources  are  infi- 
nite, by  reason  of  the  satisfactions  of  Christ,  and  therefore 


480  CONCERNING  INDULGENCES. 

never  will  be  exhausted;  besides  the  superabundant  satisfac- 
tions of  pious  men  are  daily  added." 

The  objection  that  all  the  good  works  of  the  saints  are 
abundantly  remunerated  by  God  in  heaven,  and  that  there- 
fore there  can  be  no  superabundant  satisfactions  from  them, 
is  thus  answered:  "All  the  good  works  of  the  saints  are 
rewarded,  in  so  far  as  they  are  meritorious,  but  not  inasmuch 
as  they  are  satisfactory;  for  many  saints  had  not  so  great 
a  debt  of  temporal  punishments,  as  the  price  of  their  satis- 
factions :  for,  V.  g.,  the  blessed  Virgin  Mary  never  contracted 
any  debt  of  punishment,  and  yet  she  underwent  the  most 
grievous  anguish :  John  the  Baptist  sanctified  in  the  womb, 
led  an  austere  life,  which  he  crowned  with  martyrdom  :  thus 
the  apostles,  martyrs,  anchorites,  and  other  innumerable 
saints  and  saintesses,  suffered  more  than  their  sins  required, 
according  to  the  manner  which  God  observes,  in  exacting 
punishments.  But  the  satisfactions  of  the  saints  concur, 
not  only  by  way  of  impetration,  as  some  pretend,  but  also 
by  way  of  payment ;  as  appears  from  the  proposition  con- 
demned in  the  case  of  Bajus,  No.  60.  By  the  sufferings  of 
the  saints  communicated  in  indulgences,  our  faults  are  not 
properly  redeemed,  but  through  the  communion  of  love, 
their  sufferings  are  shared  by  us,  that  we  may  be  worthy, 
who  are  delivered  by  the  price  of  Christ's  blood,  from  the 
punishments  due  for  sins.  It  is  plain  from  these  remarks, 
that  the  effect  of  indulgences  is  the  remission  of  the  tem- 
poral punishment,  remaining  after  the  remission  of  sin  as  to 
its  guilt;  but  the  guilt  itself  of  the  sin,  is  not  directly  remit- 
ted through  indulgences. 

"  Obj.  Popes  sometimes  say  in  bulls,  that  they  grant  in- 
dulgences of  sins  :  therefore,  &c.  Aims.  The  cause  is  put 
for  the  effect,  and  an  indulgence  of  the  punishment  from  the 
sin  is  signified ;  in  which  sense  it  is  said,  2  Mace.  xii.  46. 
*  It  is  therefore  a  holy  and  wholesome  thought,  to  pray  for  the 
dead,  that  they  may  be  loosed  from  sins.'  Also,  when  an 
indulgence  from  the  guilt  and  penalty  is  said  to  be  granted, 
the  power  of  absolving  from  any  fault  whatever,  in  the 
sacrament  of  penance,  and  of  relaxing  temporal  punish- 
ments is  meant ;  as  Lezana  teaches,  together  with  others. 
But  indulgences  avail  not  only  in  the  court  of  the  Church, 
but  also  in  the  court  of  God ;  that  is,  they  not  only  liberate 


COr^CERNING  INDULGENCES.  481 

from  punishments,  inasmuch  as  they  would  otherwise  be 
enjoined  by  the  Church ;  but  also,  inasmuch  as  they  are 
due  to  God,  and  would  otherwise  have  to  be  expiated,  either 
here  or  in  purgatory,  as  will  be  shown  more  at  length  here- 
aAer."     (No.  236.) 

The  division  of  indulgences  is  as  follows:  (No.  237.) 

"  1.  Into  local,  real,  and  personal.  2.  Into  plenary,  and 
not  plenary :  some  also  are  more  full ;  others  ^te  most  full. 
3.  Into  perpetual  and  temporal. 

*'  Perpetual  are  those  which  are  granted  for  ever,  without 
limitation  of  time.  Temporal,  are  those  which  are  conceded 
only  for  a  limited  period,  say  for  seven  years,  which  having 
elapsed,  they  cease.  Local  indulgences  are  such  as  are 
appointed  for  some  place,  say  a  temple,  altar,  &c.  Real, 
are  those  which  are  annexed  to  any  material  thing,  v.  g.,  a 
rosary,  a  coin,  an  image,  &c. :  very  often,  however,  such 
are  carried  about,  which  do  not  in  truth  subsist."  (Beware 
of  counterfeits !) 

"  Personal,  are  those  which  are  directly  granted  to  a  per- 
son, without  limitation  to  a  thing  or  place. 

"  What  indulgences  are  plenary  7  Those  which  are 
granted  for  the  remission  of  all  the  temporal  punishment 
which  the  person  owes :  those  are  called  more  full,  which  in 
addition  to  this,  give  the  power  of  absolving  from  cases  and 
censures  reserved  to  the  pontiff:  and  those  are  called  the 
most  full,  to  which  is  added,  besides  the  aforesaid  things, 
according  to  Collet,  the  power  of  commuting  vows,  or  of 
dispensing  in  certain  irregularities.  Observe,  that  although 
plenary  indulgences  are  sometimes  given  under  this  expres- 
sion :  Indulgences  in  the  form  of  a  jubilee,  they  never  have 
privilege  to  the  extent  of  absolution,  from  reserved  cases, 
&c.,  unless  it  is  formally  and  expressly  contained  in  the 
bull.  For  these  words  are  not  added,  in  order  that  the  more 
ample  effect  of  the  indulgence  may  be  expressed,  but  that 
the  greater  desire  and  abundance  of  the  cause  may  be  im- 
plied, and  that  anxiety  may  be  excited  in  the  faithful,  of 
earning  the  indulgence."     So  Suarez  and  others. 

"  What  indulgences  are  called  not  plenary  ?  Those 
which  are  not  conceded  for  the  remission  of  the  entire  tem- 
poral punishment,  but  are  usually  limited  through  certain 
days  or  years,  according  to  the  mode  in  which  the  canonical 


482  CONCERNING  INDULGENCES. 

penances  were  formerly  prescribed;  after  these  were  aU» - 
gated,  the  use  of  indulgences  began  to  be  more  common, 
and  as  it  were,  succeeded  in  their  place  :  and  thus  the  mode 
was  introduced  of  measuring,  or  determining  indulgences, 
not  according  to  months  or  weeks,  but  by  days  and  years, 
as  the  canonical  penances  prescribed. 

"  Whati  therefore,  is  signified  by  an  indulgence,  v.  g., 
of  a  hundred  days  1  Ans.  It  is  not  meant,  that  by  this 
indulgence  a  person  is  liberated  from  a  punishment  in  pur- 
gatory, that  will  last  precisely  one  hundred  days,  as  the 
common  people  suppose ;  but  that  he,  who  obtains  this  in- 
dulgence of  a  hundred  days,  may  obtain  so  great  a  remis- 
sion of  temporal  punishments  in  this  life,  or  of  those  which 
are  to  be  expiated  in  purgatory,  as  he  would  have  obtained, 
if  he  had  really  performed  a  penance  of  a  hundred  days, 
such  as  was  wont  to  be  imposed,  according  to  the  canons, 
regarding  it  indeed,  merely  inasmuch  as  it  is  satisfactory : 
but  the  remission  of  how  much  temporal  punishment,  or  of 
how  many  days  to  be  expiated  in  purgatory,  may  correspond 
to  this  penance  or  indulgence  of  one  hundred  days,  is  not 
altogether  known  ;  perhaps  not  even  ten  days. 

"  Hence  also,  is  understood  what  is  meant  by  an  in- 
dulgence of  one  or  more  quadragence,  which  is  sometimes 
granted ;  a  quadragena,  according  to  the  canons,  was  a  fast 
to  be  continued  through  forty  days ;  but  when  it  was  per- 
formed on  bread  and  water,  it  was  called  carena,  from 
wanting  other  food.     (Carendo  alifs  cibis.)" 

"  But  what  is  to  be  said  of  indulgences  of  a  thousand 
or  even  more  years,  which  are  recorded  as  having  sometimes 
been  granted  7  I  answer  with  Steyaert :  the  same  as  of 
plenary  indulgences,  which  are  still  more  copious ;  for  some 
one  might  have  been  a  debtor  of  so  many  years  of  penance, 
if  he  had  sinned  to  such  an  extent,  that  so  great  a  penance 
was  due  to  him.  Neither  ought  it  to  appear  wonderful,  that 
so  many  years  of  punishment  were  due  to  the  sins  of  any 
one,  according  to  the  canons,  although  he  could  not  live  so 
long :  because  this  length  of  time,  says  Boudart,  might  be 
diminished  by  the  earnestness  and  fervour  of  charity,  by 
which  the  works  enjoined,  and  other  works  of  virtues  might 
be  produced  :  hence,  some  persons  have  unjustly  inveighed 
against  these  indulgences  of  many  years,  as  though  framed 


CONCERNING  INDULGENCES.  483 

by  those  who  disposed  of  them,  and  never  granted  by  the 
Churcli ;  on  which  account,  Steyaert  admonishes,  that  this 
is  one  of  the  passages  to  be  cautiously  read  in  Estius. 
Meanwhile,  Benedict  XIV.  may  be  consulted,"  &c. 


That  the  Church  has  the  power  of  granting  indulgences, 
is  proved  by  a  decree  of  the  council  of  Trent ;  by  Matt.  xvi. 
19.  I  give  unto  thee  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven, 
&c. ;  and  John  xxi.  17.  Feed  my  sheep;  also  by  2  Cor.  ii. 
10,  where  Paul  remits  a  part  of  the  temporal  punishment, 
which  the  incestuous  Corinthian  owed  I !     (No.  238.) 

The  Pope  is  the  supreme  dispenser  of  indulgences ;  and 
he  has  plenitude  of  power  with  respect  of  the  whole  Church. 
The  bishop  may  grant  indulgences  in  his  diocese,  and  the 
archbishop  through  a  whole  province,  of  one  year,  at  the 
dedication  of  a  church,  and  of  forty  days,  at  the  anniversary 
of  the  dedication,  &c.  The  bishops  have  this  authority  only 
from  ecclesiastical  right,  the  Pope  by  divine  right.  (No.  239.) 

The  person  enjoying  an  indulgence,  must  be  baptized  and 
in  a  state  of  grace.    (No.  240.) 

If  conceded  without  just  cause,  it  is  invalid.  "  It  is  to  be 
observed  with  Bellarmine,  that  a  just  cause  for  the  most  part, 
embraces  two  things,  viz. ;  some  object  acceptable  to  God, 
and  some  work  enjoined,  in  order  to  obtain  that  object ;  so 
that  the  attainment  of  the  object  may  be  more  acceptable  to 
God,  than  the  satisfaction  itself,  which  is  relaxed  through 
the  indulgence.  Thus  an  indulgence  is  frequently  conceded 
to  men,  who  have  deserved  well  of  the  Church,  without 
actual  works."     (No.  243.) 

In  No.  244,  it  is  gravely  asked  "whether  indulgences  are 
worth  as  much  as  they  sound?"  And  what  is  stranger  still, 
the  question  is  answered  affirmatively,  "  because  otherwise, 
the  concession  of  indulgences  would  contain  a  fraud,  and  the 
Church  or  ecclesiastical  superior,  proclaiming  or  pronouncing 
the  indulgences,  might  be  accused  of  lying  or  falsehood, 

WHICH    IS    ABSUED." 

Whoever  heard  of  a  lie  or  a  falsehood,  or  any  thing  of 
the  kind,  being  for  a  moment  tolerated  in  the  Church  of 
Rome  1     Such  a  supposition  would  verily  be  absurd  / 


484  CONCERNING  INDULGENCES. 

There  is  this  difference  between  an  indulgence  for  the  living 
and  one  foe  the  dead ;  an  indulgence  for  the  living,  is  not 
only  a  payment,  but  an  absolution :  whereas,  an  indulgence 
for  the  dead,  is  merely  a  payment.  That  indulgences  may 
be  applied  to  souls  in  purgatory  and  profit  them,  is  quite 
certain. 

"  1.  Because  private  believers  may  apply  their  own  satis- 
factions to  souls  in  purgatory;  therefore  the  Pope  may  apply 
to  them  the  satisfactions  of  Christ  and  the  saints,  from  the 
treasury  of  the  Church.  2.  The  Pope  may  apply  in- 
dulgences to  the  living ;  therefore,  also  to  the  dead,  as  they 
are  members  of  the  same  body^"  To  the  somewhat  formi- 
dable objection,  that  "  the  power  of  conferring  indulgences, 
is  founded  on  the  words  of  Christ,  Whatsoever  ye  shall  bind 
upon  earth,  shall  be  bound  in  heaven  ;  but  the  souls  in  pur- 
gatory are  not  upon  earth,  therefore,  &;c :"  the  answer  is 
given;  "  1.  These  words  upon  earth,  according  to  many, 
are  not  referred  to  the  object  of  the  loosing,  or  to  those  who 
are  loosedj  but  to  the  Superior  loosing,  who  only  can  loose, 
so  long  as  he  is  upon  earth.  2.  The  Church  only  does  con- 
cerning the  dead,  what  the  faithful  do,  who  offer  prayers  and 
satisfactions  to  God,  that  souls  may  be  freed  from  punish- 
ments; thus  also,  the  Church  offers  the  satisfactions  of 
Christ  and  the  saints,  in  payment  of  punishments  due  by 
them."  Indulgences  may  be  applied  to  the  dead,  "  then 
only  when  it  is  expressly  signified,  that  the  indulgences  are 
«o  made,  that  they  may  be  applied  to  the  dead :  the  reason 
is,  that  indulgences  are  valid,  only  for  those  for  whom  they 
are  granted  :  but  when  they  are  conceded  for  the  dead,  par- 
ticular mention  is  usually  made :  therefore,  if  this  mention 
is  not  made,  they  cannot  be  applied  to  .them.  For  the  same 
reason,  no  one  can  apply  indulgences  to  another  living  per- 
son, unless  this  is  expressly  granted  ;  which  is  not  wont  to 
be  done."     (No.  245.) 

Whether  indulgenceiJ  for  the  dead  infallibly  have  their 
effect  or  not  is  a  mooted  point ;  but  the  Romish  doctors 
generally  opine  that  they  have  the  same  value  for  the  dead 
as  for  the  living,  in  which  conclusion  every  Protestant  will 
heartily  concur. 


CONCERNING  INDULGENCES.  485 

"  An  altar  is  said  to  be  privileged,  to  which  a  plenary- 
indulgence  is  annexed  for  that  soul  for  which  mass  is  said 
at  that  altar."  Whether  the  soul  is  by  this  very  act  liber- 
ated from  purgatory,  whilst  mass  is  said  for  it  at  the  privileged 
altar  is  uncertain  ;  besides  it  is  also  not  known  whether  the 
cause  of  the  concession  is  fully  sufficient,  whether  the  cele- 
brant offers  with  sofficient  fervour  in  order  to  obtain  what  he 
asks,  and  finally  whether  God  here  and  now  accepts  the 
satisfactions  offered  to  him  in  payment  of  the  remaining 
debt.     (No.  248.) 

By  the  Jubilee  "  is  properly  signified  that  plenary  indul- 
gence, which  is  granted  with  a  certain  solemnity  by  the 
Roman  Pontiff  with  various  favours  and  particular  privileges 
to  those  who  have  performed  the  prescribed  good  works.  A 
two-fold  Jubilee  is  usually  distinguished  :  one  ordinary,  which 
is  granted  only  every  twenty-fifth  year  to  persons  visiting 
the  designated  churches  at  Rome,  and  performing  the  other 
things  requisite ;  and  it  is  called  the  Jubilee  of  the  holy  year : 
the  other  extraordinary,  which  the  Pontiffs  concede  for 
important  reasons  occurring  out  of  the  25th  year ;  such 
as  every  Pope  is  wont  to  concede  at  the  beginning  of  his 
pontificate  for  a  happy  reign." 

"  The  Jubilee  of  the  holy  year  at  Rome  lasts  through  the 
whole  year,  beginning  from  the  first  Vespers  of  the  Lord's 
nativity  with  the  ceremony  of  the  opening  of  the  Sacred 
Gate ;  which  in  the  vigil  of  the  nativity  of  the  following 
year  is  shut  up  with  a  new  wall,  and  remains  thus  closed 
until  a  holy  year  again  recurs."     (No.  249.) 

In  order  to  know  what  privileges  are  granted,  the  bull  of 
concession  must  always  be  consulted  :  because  they  are  not 
always  the  same,  but  sometimes  more,  sometimes  fewer. 
(No.  250.) 

There  is  scarcely  any  peculiarity  of  the  Romish  church  which 
awakens  more  painful  feelings  than  the  general  topic  which  has  been 
discussed  in  the  last  two  chapters.  It  is  degrading  to  human  nature 
to  find  men  of  general  intelligence  who  can  nevertheless  so  far  forget 
themselves  as  to  bow  down  to  a  fellow-mortal,  and  breathe  into  his  ear 
the  confession,  which  should  be  made  to  God  alone.  The  priest  claims 
the  prerogative  of  God ;  literally  sits  in  the  temple  as  God,  and  thus 
perfectly  fulfils  the  sure  word  of  prophecy,  which  designates  this  as  a 
striking  feature  of  the  Romish  apostasy.  As  man  he  knows  nothing 
41 


486  CONCERNING  INDULGENCES. 

that  is  stated  to  him  by  the  penitent :  so  long  as  the  husband  or  wife, 
or  child  is  at  his  feet  in  the  confessional,  he  sits  upon  the  throne  of 
God  as  a  spiritual  judge  !  This  is  literally  the  arrogant  claim  of  every 
Romish  priest  who  professes  to  absolve  his  fellow-creatures  from  their 
sins !  Is  it  not  inconceivable  that  any  mortal  should  dare  to  usurp 
this  prerogative  ?  arid,  above  all  that  men  should  be  found  willing  to 
recognize  the  claim  and  actually  to  prostrate  themselves  at  his  feet 
that  they  may  obtain  the  Holy  Father's  blessing  and  absolution  ? 

There  are  passages  in  Peter  Dens'  Treatise  on  Penance,  &c.,  which 
I  have  been  obliged  from  a  regard  to  decency  to  pass  by.  I  would 
not  outrage  the  feelings  of  my  reader  by  stripping  them  of  their  Latin 
disguise,  and  their  deformity  is  such  that  even  this  covering  would  be 
insufficient  to  hide  it  from  an  English  reader.  Paul  tells  us  that 
it  is  a  shame  to  speak  of  certain  things  that  were  done  among  the 
Gentiles,  but  it  is  actually  a  shame  even  to  think  of  some  of  the  topics 
which  are  discussed  with  the  most  obscene  discrimination  by  Roman 
theologians,  and  with  which  their  minds  must  be  familiar  before  ever 
they  can  hear  confessions.  Every  form  of  imaginable  and  unimagi- 
nable bestiality  is  investigated  with  the  closest  scrutiny,  and  questions 
are  propoimded,  which  to  use  the  language  of  a  living  member  of  the 
Romish  church,  "  are  enough  to  make  the  hair  of  one's  head  stand  up." 
There  is  nothing  connected  with  the  matrimonial  state,  nothing  too 
sacred  or  secret  in  the  virtuous  intercourse  of  those  whom  God  has 
joined,  which  is  not  made  a  subject  of  impudent  inquiry.  No  matter 
whether  the  penitent  be  male  or  female,  the  priest  may  propound  what 
interrogatories  he  chooses.  We  cannot  say  we  pity  the  man,  who  will 
suffer  his  wife  and  daughters  to  be  thus  tortured  and  trodden  down 
by  a  Popish  priest;  if  it  ever  can  be  lawful  to  turn  with  loathing  from 
a  fellow-creature,  we  might  be  pardoned  for  an  expression  of  disgust 
at  the  sight  of  such  an  object ;  but  when  we  remember  the  force  of 
education,  the  deadly  influence  of  Popish  superstition  which  is  the 
rankest  form  that  fanaticism  has  ever  assumed  ;  the  power  of  the 
strong  delusions  that  can  bind  the  soul  of  man  with  a  chain  of  ada- 
mant, and  fetter  every  noble  principle,  we  bless  God  that  we  were  not 
educated  in  the  nurture  and  admonition  of  the  church  of  Rome,  and 
we  pray  for  our  deluded  brethren,  Father  forgive  them,  they  know  not 
what  they  do ! 

Satan  could  not  possibly  have  devised  a  scheme,  which  more  com- 
pletely  subverts  the  principles  and  the  design  of  the  gospel  than  this 
fatal  system.  The  poor  Papist  is  taught  to  regard  his  prayers,  (such 
as  they  are,)  the  reading  of  the  Scriptures,  &c,  as  punishments ;  when 


CONCERNING  INDULGENCES.  487 

he  wishes  to  make  satisfaction  for  his  sins,  he  goes  over  the  rosary  or 
the  litany  of  the  Blessed  Virgin.  If  he  has  been  drunk  six  times,  in 
as  many  days,  he  gets  absolution,  and  is  ready  to  run  up  a  new  score 
with  the  landlord  and  his  Maker,  so  soon  as  with  due  preparation,  he 
has  read  the  seven  penitential  psalms  on  his  bended  knees,  with  arms 
extended  before  a  crucifix !  What  if  the  priest  does  charge  him  to 
keep  away  from  the  tavern  ?  If  he  can  obtain  forgiveness  at  so  cheap 
a  rate,  he  will  get  drunk  again,  and  do  penance  for  it  with  a  hearty 
good  will. 

Who  does  not  see  that  the  practical  result  of  this  spiritual,  or  rather 
carnal  discipline,  will  be  to  fill  him  with  the  most  determined  and  in- 
veterate  hatred  for  prayer,  and  for  the  Bible  ?  He  will  love  them  just 
as  soon,  and  as  much  as  the  schoolboy  loves  the  rod !  We  may  be 
told  that  in  many  instances  the  operation  of  the  confessional  is  bene- 
ficial ;  that  stolen  property  is  frequently  restored  to  its  rightful  owner, 
and  that  the  mere  fact  that  the  Papist  acknowledges  his  obligation  to 
confess  his  sins  against  God  and  his  neighbour,  will  make  him  careful 
not  to  commit  such  transgressions,  especially  when,  in  addition  to  the 
dread  of  the  humiliation  of  a  minute  confession,  he  is  deterred  by  fear 
of  the  sacramental  satisfaction  or  penance  which  his  confessor  may 
and  must  impose.  But  even  supposing  that  all  the  advantages  are 
gained  for  which  the  most  strenuous  advocates  of  this  Romish  practice 
contend,  they  are  too  dearly  purchased.  The  price  is  the  surrender 
of  the  penitent's  liber^  as  a  man,  the  recognition  of  a  blasphemous  as- 
sumption  of  a  divine  prerogative,  and  the  fatal  delusion  that  sins  can 
be  blotted  out  of  the  book  of  God's  remembrance,  by  means  of  a  paltry 
penance,  imposed  at  the  option  of  the  confessor  !  Satan  would  rejoice 
to  see  all  the  stolen  property  in  creation,  restored  on  such  terms ! 

If  the  Romish  priests  were  pure  as  angels,  and  as  fully  proof  against 
the  seductive  influences  of  temptation  as  the  marble  pillars  in  their 
cathedral,  it  would  still  be  unpardonable  idolatry  to  confess  to  them, 
because  this  is  an  act  of  worship,  which  belongs  to  God  alone.  But, 
alas !  their  reverences  are  most  unfortunately,  at  best,  only  earthen 
vessels ;  and  though  they  sit  as  God,  in  temples  professedly  dedicated 
to  the  Most  High,  they  do  occasionally  afford  lamentable  evidence  that 
they  are  men  of  like  passions  with  the  rest  of  their  fellow-mortals.  We 
might  remind  our  readers  of  facts  illustrative  of  this  remark,  but  they 
are  neither  so  few  nor  far  between  as  to  render  specifications  very  ne- 
cessary. Let  it  not  be  supposed,  however,  that  we  are  so  prejudiced 
against  Romish  priests  as  to  be  unwilling  to  accord  to  them  the  praise 
that  is  due ;  we  may  as  well  acknowledge  in  this  connection,  the  dis- 


488  CONCERNING  INDULGENCES. 

interested  zeal  of  the  holy  fathers  in  the  endowment  of  orphan  asy- 
lums,  and  the  special  and  almost  paternal  reg-ard  which  they  enter- 
tain for  the  nephews  and  nieces,  with  which  a  kind  Providence 
bountifully  supplies  the  defect  of  sons  and  daughters ;  for  of  course  it 
is  known  that  the  reverend  confessors  are  bound  by  a  vow  of  perpetual 
celibacy,  which  under  pain  of  sacrilege  they  may  not  forget 

But  there  is  another  view  of  the  practical  operation  of  the  confes- 
sional, which  is  calculated  to  awaken  alarm.  We  are  not  surprised  at 
the  strict  injunction  of  secresy,  because  it  is  the  only  preservative  of 
the  confessional.  Penitents  would  not  resort  to  the  priest,  if  this  in- 
junction were  removed.  But  we  call  attention  to  the  presumption 
which  makes  the  authority  of  the  confessional  superior  to  all  civil  or 
judicial  authority,  and  which  absolves  the  priest  from  all  guilt  in  con- 
cealing anything  which  he  has  learned  in  confession,  although  the  life 
or  salvation  of  a  man,  or  the  ruin  op  the  state  should  be  involved  in 
his  silence.  To  cap  the  climax,  if  questioned  concerning  it,  to  use  the 
language  of  Dens  :  "  J^e  must  reply  that  he  does  not  know  it,  and  if  it 
is  necessary,  he  must  confirm  the  same  with  an  oath  !  Again  :  "  if 
a  confessor  be  cited  in  a  judicial  case,  that  he  may  give  his  reason  for 
refusing  absolution,  he  must  protest  that  in  this  case,  he  acknowledges 
no  superior  except  God .'"  If  we  are  not  mistaken,  a  case  in  point 
was  tried  some  years  ago  in  the  state  of  New  York,  in  which  the 
court  actually  recognized  the  priest's  scruples  ;  it  is  doubtful,  however, 
if  a  confessor  were  detected  in  a  flat  perju»jr  by  a  Philadelphia 
Court,  whether  his  reverence  would  not  have  an  opportunity  of  pre- 
paring a  treatise  on  fasting,  according  to  the  rules  of  the  Moyamensing 
Manual.  The  results  of  his  experience  would  perhaps  be  very  nearly 
as  valuable  as  the  brilliant  dissertations  of  Pope  Benedict  XIV.,  on  the 
drinking  of  chocolate,  and  the  smoking  of  segars  on  a  fast  day  ;  and, 
(which  is  a  very  great  consideration,)  the  materials  for  the  work 
would  be  collected  at  the  expense  of  the  state,  so  that,  if  the  priest 
chose  to  be  generous,  he  might  devote  the  profits  to  the  support  of  St. 
Joseph's  Orphan  Asylum.  The  case  as  yet,  however,  is  altogether 
hypothetical,  and  we  would  not  be  understood  as  presuming  to  dictate 
to  a  conscientious  confessor. 


CONCERNING  EXTREME  UNCTION.  489 


CHAPTER  XLI. 

Treatise   concerning  the   Sacrament  of  Extreme 
Unction. 

PREFACE. 

"  The  names  of  the  sacrament  of  extreme  unction,  are  various :  from 
the  matter,  the  Greeks  call  it  holy  oil ;  from  the  matter  and  form  to- 
gether, it  is  called  by  the  same,  prayer  with  oil ;  from  the  subject, 
upon  whom  it  is  conferred,  it  is  called  by  the  Latins,  the  anointing-  of 
the  sick,  also,  the  sacrament  of  the  departing  ;  from  the  effect  which 
it  produces,  it  is  called  by  the  Council  of  Trent,  the  consummating  sa- 
erament  of  Penance.     We  preface  according  to  our  custom 

77ie  Decree  of  the  Council  of  Florence  for  the  instruction  of  the 
Armenians. 
"  The  fifth  sacrament  is  extreme  unction,  the  matter  of  which  is 
olive  oil,  blessed  by  the  bishop :  this  sacrament  ought  not  to  be  dis- 
pensed  except  to  a  sick  person  whose  death  is  apprehended  ;  who  is  to 
be  anointed  on  these  parts :  on  the  eyes,  on  account  of  vision  ;  on  the 
ears,  on  account  of  hearing  ;  on  the  nostrils,  on  account  of  scent ;  on 
the  mouth,  for  taste  or  speech ;  on  the  hands,  for  touching ;  on  the 
feet,  for  walking;  on  the  reins,  for  the  pleasure,  «&c.  &c. — The 
form  of  this  sacrament  is:  Through  this  unction,  and  his  own  most 
gracious  mercy,  may  God  pardon  thee,  whatever  thou  hast  done  amiss 
through  sight,  &c.,  and  likewise  in  the  other  members.  The  minister 
of  this  sacrament  is  the  priest :  but  the  effect  is  the  healing  of  the 
mind,  and  in  so  far  as  is  expedient,  also,  of  the  body  itself.  Concern- 
ing this  sacrament,  the  blessed  Apostle  James  says,  ch.  v.  14,  15 :  *  Is 
any  sick  among  you?  Let  him  bring  in  the  priests  of  the  church,  and 
let  them  pray  over  him,  anointing  him  with  oil,  in  the  name  of 
the  Lord ;  and  the  prayer  of  faith  shall  save  the  sick  man,  and  the 
Lord  shall  raise  him  up ;  and  if  he  be  in  sins,  they  shall  be  forgiven 
him.' 

Canons  of  the  Council  of  Trent  concerning  Extreme  Unction. 
"  1.  Whoever  shall  say  that  extreme  unction  is  not  truly  and  pro- 
perly a  sacrament,  instituted  by  Christ  our  Lord,  and  promulgated  by 
the  blessed  Apostle  James,  but  only  a  rite  received  from  the  fathers,  or 
a  human  invention  ;  let  him  be  accursed  ! 
41  ^ 


490  CONCERNING  EXTREME  UNCTION. 

"  2.  Whoever  shall  say  that  the  sacred  anointing  of  the  sick  does 
not  confer  grace  nor  remit  sins,  nor  raise  up  the  sick,  but  that  it  has 
now  ceased,  as  if  the  gift  of  healing  existed  only  in  past  ages :  let  him 
be  accursed ! 

"  3.  Whoever  shall  say  that  the  ceremony  of  extreme  unction,  and 
the  practice  which  the  holy  Roman  Church  observes,  are  repugnant  to 
the  meaning  of  the  blessed  Apostle  James,  and  that  therefore  they  are 
to  be  changed,  and  may  be  despised  by  Christians  without  sin ;  let  him 
be  accursed ! 

"  4.  Whoever  shall  say  that  the  elders  of  the  Church,  who  the  bless- 
ed James  advises  should  be  sent  for  to  anoint  the  sick,  are  not  priests 
ordained  by  the  bishop,  but  those  who  are  the  more  advanced  in  age, 
in  any  community ;  and  that  on  this  account  the  proper  minister  of 
extreme  unction  is  not  the  priest  alone ;  let  him  be  accursed  !" 

Extreme  unction  is  defined  as  a  sacrament  in  which  the 
sick  man  is  anointed  with  holy  oil  by  the  priest,  under  a 
prescribed  form  of  words,  for  the  healing  of  the  mind  and 
body.  It  is  proved  to  be  a  sacrament  from  the  words  of 
James  above  quoted,  from  the  definition  of  the  councils  of 
Trent  and  Florence,  and  from  the  constant  practice  of  the 
Church,  as  well  the  Latin  as  the  Greek :  indeed,  the  Greek 
schismatics  themselves,  admit  this  sacrament:  but  Luther 
and  Calvin  have  rejected  it.  That  all  the  essentials  of  this 
sacrament  are  designated  by  James,  is  demonstrated  thus: 

"By  saying,  (v.  14.)  If  any  one  is  sicJe,  he  designates 
the  subject  to  be  a  person  dangerously  sick,  and  that  he  is 
baptized  ;  by  adding  among  you,  that  is  the  faithful :  by  say- 
ing, let  him  bring  in  the  priests,  he  intimates  that  the  minis- 
ter is  a  priest ;  by  these  words,  let  them  pray  over  him,  and 
the  prayer  of  faith,  he  denotes  its  deprecative  form ;  by  the 
word  anointing,  he  intimates  that  the  proximate  matter  is 
the  unction,  and  by  the  following  words,  m^7t  oil  in  the  name 
of  the  Lord,  that  the  remote  matter  is  oil  that  has  been 
blessed :  in  the  words,  shall  save  the  sicJc  man,  and  raise 
him  up,  &c.,  it  explains  the  effects  of  this  sacrament. 

"  Obj.  In  this  epistle,  the  question  is  discussed,  merely 
concerning  the  natural  efficacy  of  the  oil  for  healing  bodily 
diseases,  and  concerning  the  gift  of  healing,  conferred  gra- 
tuitously; therefore,  &c. 

"  Ans.  1.  I  deny  the  antecedent;  because  he  would  not, 
in  that  case,  have  commanded  the  elders  to  be  called,  but 


CONCERNING  EXTREME  UNCTION.  491 

the  physicians,  or  those  who  have  the  gift  of  healing;  which 
was  not  given  to  all  the  elders,  nor  to  them  only. 

"  2.  The  gift  of  healing  was  not  given  only  for  the  sick, 
of  whom  St.  James  treats,  but  also  for  the  blind,  the  lame,  &c. 

"  3.  The  remission  of  sins,  which  St.  James  places  as  the 
effect  of  this  anointing,  cannot  be  attributed  to  the  natural 
virtue  of  the  oil,  or  to  the  gift  of  healing.  The  anointings 
applied  by  the  apostles,  Mark  vi.  13,  "  they  anointed  with  oil 
many  that  were  sick,  and  healed  them,"  were  not  sacramental, 
because  they  referred  only  or  principally,  to  the  healing  of 
bodily  disease :  but  the  sacraments  in  themselves,  pertain  to 
the  soul,  to  the  body  by  accident,  and  at  most  secondarily: 
and  hence,  these  anointings  were  only  figures,  by  which  this 
sacrament  was  insinuated,  as  the  council  of  Trent  says,  sess. 
14,  concerning  extreme  unction,  ch.  1." 

Was  this  sacrament  instituted  immediately  hy  Christ  7 
"Yes:  (!! !)  it  is  inferred  from  the  council  of  Trent^  sess. 
14,  &c.,  in  which  it  teaches,  that  it  was  promulgated  by  St. 
James ;  it  judged  therefore,  that  it  was  instituted  not  by  him, 
but  immediately  by  Christ.  When  did  Christ  institute  it  7 
The  time  is  uncertain :  probably  however,  he  instituted  it 
after  his  resurrection,  in  the  period  of  forty  days,  in  which 
he  spoke  to  his  disciples  concerning  the  kingdom  of  God,  or 
concerning  the  affairs  of  the  Church,  and  in  which,  as  S. 
Leo  says,  the  great  sacraments  were  confirmed.  Probably 
also,  he  instituted  it  after  the  sacrament  of  penance,  of  which 
it  is  the  perfection  and  consummation,  had  been  instituted." 

*'  The  oil  of  the  sick,  which  is  the  matter  of  this  sacra- 
ment, together  with  the  chrism  and  the  oil  of  catechumens, 
is  solemnly  blessed  by  the  bishop,  every  year  on  the  day  of 
the  Lord's  supper,  who  distributes  .them  to  the  archpresby- 
ters,  and  they  to  the  pastors ;  for  this  purpose  each  pastor 
brings  three  silver  or  pewter  vessels,  marked  with  letters  for 
the  sake  of  distinction,  in  which  silk  or  some  other  spongy 
matter  is  usually  deposited,  in  order  to  avoid  the  danger  of 
spilling.  When  fresh  oils  are  brought,  the  old  ones  are 
burned,  and  the  ashes  are  sent  into  the  sacristy,  or  if  the 
quantity  is  considerable,  it  may  be  consumed  in  a  lamp,  be- 
fore the  adorable  sacrament,"  &c. 

In  case  the  oil  blessed  by  the  bishop  should  fail  before 
the  annual  period  for  preparing  new  has  arrived,  oil  that 


492  CONCERNING  EXTREME  UNCTION. 

has  not  been  blessed  may  be  mixed  with  it,  but  the  quantity 
must  be  less  than  the  holy  oil  which  remains.  The  proxi- 
mate matter  of  the  sacrament  of  extreme  unction,  is  the 
anointing,  or  the  use  and  application  of  the  oil.  Although 
the  council  of  Florence  requires  the  sick  and  dying  to  be 
anointed  on  the  loins,  yet  for  modesty's  sake,  the  breast,  or 
in  females,  the  lower  part  of  the  throat  has  been  substituted ; 
•so  that  the  unction  is  applied  to  the  eyes,  ears,  nose,  mouth 
and  hands,  and  then  to  the  breast  and  the  feet. 

Here  there  appears  to  us  to  be  something  of  a  dilemma.  Why  has 
the  recommendation  of  the  council  of  Florence  been  changed  ?  Was 
it  not  an  infallible,  oecumenical  council  ?  So  the  Church  of  Rome 
would  have  us  believe ;  and  yet  for  modesty's  sake,  the  mode  of  admin- 
istering this  sacrament  of  Christ's  own  institution,  has  been  changed ! 
Therefore  the  council  of  Florence  has  recommended  a  practice,  which 
is  too  indecent  even  for  Romish  priests  to  perform,  without  material 
modification ;  and  thus  by  their  own  act,  they  prove  that  the  council 
of  Florence  was  immodest,  and  hence  not  infallible.  If  the  mode 
enjoined  by  this  council,  was  suggested  by  the  holy  Spirit,  what  right 
have  the  priests  to  modify  it?  We  apprehend,  that  serious  injury 
must  be  done  to  the  souls  of  the  faithful,  by  this  unwarrantable  inno- 
vation. If  I  were  a  believer  and  an  advocate  of  extreme  unction,  I 
would  insist  upon  the  literal  fulfilment  of  the  injunction  of  the  council 
of  Florence,  in  order  to  obviate  all  risk  of  invalidating  the  sacrament. 
The  anointing  upon  the  loins,  has  a  special  local  signification,  which 
is  entirely  lost  in  the  application  of  the  holy  oil  upon  the  throat. 

The  feet  are  anointed  on  the  upper  part,  lest  the  holy  oil 
might  seem  to  be  trodden  under  foot.  The  anointing  of  the 
eyes  is  not  done  on  the  pupil,  but  on  the  eyelid ;  the  anoint- 
ing for  the  sense  of  taste  is  performed  on  the  lips,  not  on  the 
tongue.  When  the  sick  man  has  neither  hands  nor  feet,  the 
unction  must  be  made  on  that  part  of  the  body  which  is 
nearest  to  where  they  ought  to  be.  The  back  of  the  hands 
must  be  anointed.  Those  who  have  been  born  blind  must 
also  be  anointed,  on  account  of  vision ;  for  though  they 
have  never  seen  any  thing,  and  consequently  could  not  sin 
by  the  organs  of  vision,  yet  they  may  have  sinned  by  desir- 
ing to  see  improper  things.  The  unction  may  be  performed 
either  with  the  thumb,  or  with  a  rod,  at  the  option  of  the 
minister.     If  there  is  danger  of  infecting  the  oil,  a  fresh  bit 


CONCERNING  EXTREME  UNCTION.  493 

of  wood  may  be  used  at  the  time  of  each  anointing,  and 
these  must  afterwards  be  burned.  As  for  the  wiping  off  of 
the  anointed  organs,  the  pastorale  prescribes-r-that  the  min- 
ister or  priest,  after  each  unction,  must  wipe  the  anointed 
parts  with  a  fresh  wad  of  silk  or  tow,  and  deposit  them  in  a 
clean  vessel,  and  burn  them;  but  if  there  is  no  fire  ready, 
the  burning  is  entrusted  to  the  servants.  The  five  unctions 
of  the  five  senses  are  alone  essential.  The  anointing  of  the 
breast  or  feet  is  not  essential ;  so  that  the  Mechlin  pastoral 
directory  teaches,  that  when  the  five  former  have  been  ap- 
plied, the  mind  of  the  priest  may  be  easy,  as  the  sick  man 
has  now  received  the  sacrament."    (No.  4.) 

The  form  of  the  sacrament  of  Extreme  Unction  is  given 
in  the  decree  of  the  Council  of  Florence. 

"  Is  the  distinct  expression  of  the  sight  and  the  other  senses 
essential  7  The  affirmative  answer  is  probable :  hence,  if  the 
priest  should  say  whatever  thou  hast  sinned  by  means  of  the 
senses,  the  sacrament  would  be  doubtful ;  just  as  it  would  be 
improper  to  administer  baptism  in  this  form :  I  baptize  thee 
in  the  name  of  the  most  Holy  Trinity.  The  following  form, 
however,  will  be  sufficient,  in  case  of  necessity  :  Through 
this  holy  unction,  and  his  own  most  gracious  mercy,  may 
the  Lord  pardon  thee  whatsoever  thou  hast  done  amiss  by 
sight,  hearing,  smell,  taste,  and  touch."  The  proper  subject 
for  extreme  unction  is  a  sick  person  who  has  attained  to 
years  of  discretion,  and  who  has  been  baptized,  and  sacra- 
mentally  absolved. 

The  effects  of  this  sacrament  are — 1.  Sanctifying  grace. 
2.  Sacramental  or  actual  graces.  3.  The  wiping  off  of  the 
remains  of  sins,  and  comfort  of  mind,  by  exciting  in  the 
sick  man  great  confidence  in  the  divine  mercy.  4.  Remis- 
sion of  sins.  5.  Healing  of  the  body.  This  latter  effect  is 
merely  secondary,  and  the  impediments  to  its  taking  place 
are — 1.  "The  indisposition  of  the  recipient.  2.  The  want 
of  faith  or  confidence  in  the  recipient.  3.  The  want  of  faith 
in  the  minister.  4.  The  too  great  progress  of  the  disease, 
so  that  health  could  not  be  restored  except  by  a  manifest 
miracle,  and  against  nature;  for  although  the  healing  of  the 
body  through  this  sacrament  is  performed  by  supernatural 
efficacy,  yet  it  ought  not  to  be  called  miraculous,  because  it 
is  effected  by  an  ordinary  and  mild  operation,  in  a  mode  of 


494  CONCERNING  EXTREME  UNCTION. 

operation  similar  to  that  of  corporeal  medicines.  5.  The 
ordinance  of  divine  providence  and  justice  otherwise  dis- 
posing." 

Extreme  Unction  may  be  repeated  as  often  as  any  one 
falls  into  a  deadly  sickness,  but  not  in  one  and  the  same 
danger  of  death  :  i.  e.  the  sickness  must  be  at  different  times. 
The  priest  is  the  proper  minister  of  this  sacrament,  and  is 
bound  under  pain  of  grievous  sin  to  administer  it  to  the  sick 
of  his  parish. 

The  sacrament  of  extreme  unction,  is  an  extreme  absurdity.  The 
practice  of  anointing  with  oil  in  the  Jewish  Church,  was  a  common 
sign  by  which  an  extraordinary  influence  was  designated.  When 
Christ  first  sent  out  the  apostles  to  preach  the  gospel,  we  learn  from 
the  divine  record,  that  he  gave  them  power  to  cast  out  unclean  spirits, 
and  to  heal  the  sick,  and  this  latter  faculty  was  connected  with  anoint- 
ing of  oil.  "  They  cast  out  many  devils,  and  anointed  with  oil  many 
that  were  sick,  and  healed  them."  Mark  vi.  13.  What  connection 
there  was  between  the  anointing  and  the  healing,  we  cannot  pretend 
to  determine ;  but  it  was  manifestly  significant,  and  was  probably 
intended  to  illustrate  a  part  of  the  Jewish  ritual.  This  power  was 
continued  to  the  apostles  after  the  Saviour's  ascension ;  and  they  had 
not  only  received  the  heavenly  unction  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  but  they 
could  impart  his  influence  to  others,  on  whom  they  laid  hands  for  that 
purpose;  and  in  this  manner,  elders  of  churches  were  appointed.  The 
Apostle  James  wrote  his  epistle  to  the  Christian  converts  from  Juda- 
ism, and  he  informs  them  that  the  divine  influence,  with  which  some 
of  their  nation  had  been  favoured,  from  the  institution  of  the  Jewish 
Church,  was  still  continued  in  the  overseers  of  the  Church,  who  were 
endowed  with  certain  miraculous  powers,  and  that  the  exercise  of  these 
powers,  was  accompanied  by  the  familiar  sign  of  anointing  with  oil. 
This  ceremony,  to  the  mind  of  a  Jew,  would  be  important  and  signi- 
ficant, though  it  might  not  be  to  us.  The  converts  then  are  exhorted 
to  avail  themselves  of  this  extraordinary  power,  whilst  it  was  con- 
tinned  among  them ;  and  are  directed  to  use  it  in  sickness,  that  they 
might  be  healed.  The  saving  of  the  sick,  according  to  James,  evi- 
dently means  their  restoration  to  health,  for  it  is  immediately  added, 
the  Lord  shall  raise  him  up.  Here  then  is  the  vast  and  irreconcileable 
discrepancy  between  the  ceremony  described  by  the  apostle,  and  the 
Romish  sacrament  of  extreme  unction.  The  apostolic  rite  was  per- 
formed with  a  view  to  the  restoration  or  healing  of  the  sick ;  the 
popish  sacrament  is  administered  to  those  only  who  are  in  danger  of 


CONCERNING  EXTREME  UNCTION.  495 

death ;  and  as  Peter  Dens  informs  us,  with  a  view  to  their  restoration 
to  health,  although  in  consequence  of  divers  impediments,  this  latter 
object  is  usually  not  attained.  In  the  apostolic  practice,  the  anointing 
of  oil  never  failed  in  connection  with  the  prayer  of  faith,  to  raise  up 
the  sick.  James  speaks  of  sickness  in  connection  with  sins,  and  in 
the  primitive  church,  such  expressions  of  divine  displeasure  were  not 
uncommon,  as  we  see  from  the  history  of  the  Church  at  Corinth ; 
1  Cor.  xi.  30.  This  power  of  healing  diseases,  with  which  Christ 
himself  uniformly  connected  the  forgiveness  of  sins,  was  a  fulfilment 
of  the  Saviour's  promise.  "  These  signs  shall  follow  them  that  be- 
lieve :  in  my  name  shall  they  cast  out  devils ;  they  shall  speak  with 
new  tongues ;  they  shall  take  up  serpents ;  and  if  they  drink  any 
deadly  thing,  it  shall  not  hurt  them ;  they  shall  lay  hands  on  the  sick^ 
and  they  shall  recover^  These  miraculous  endowments  were  to  be 
conferred  on  those  that  shall  believe,  not  on  the  apostles  alone ;  they 
were  gifts  which  belonged  to  the  Church  in  that  age,  and  were  given 
for  her  establishment.  If  the  priests  have  this  power,  let  them  show 
it.  They  will  not  taste  a  poisoned  wafer  after  its  consecration,  nor 
will  they  drink  wine  in  which  poison  has  been  mixed,  although  the 
ancient  promise,  upon  part  of  which  they  have  based  the  sacrament 
of  extreme  unction,  assures  them  that  believe,  that  "  if  they  drink  any 
deadly  thing,  it  shall  not  hurt  them."  If  the  priests  can  cast  out 
devils,  (and  I  know  any  one  of  them  professes  to  be  a  match  for  a 
whole  legion  of  them,  when  he  is  armed  with  a  pot  of  holy  water), 
and  handle  serpents,  and  drink  poison  without  being  hurt,  and  heal 
the  sick  by  laying  hands  on  them,  they  may  then  with  propriety, 
employ  the  significant  sign  of  the  anointing  with  oil;  but  if  they  can. 
not  perform  these  miracles,  the  ceremony  of  the  unction  becomes 
extreme  mummery ! 

Ecclesiastical  burial  is  to  be  denied  according  to  the  Roman 
ritual,  to  the  following  classes  of  unhappy  human  beings.  To  Pagans, 
Jews,  and  all  infidels,  heretics  and  their  abettors,  apostates  from  the 
Christian  faith  and  schismatics ;  and  some  assert  that  a  strong  suspi- 
cion of  heresy  or  infidelity,  is  sufficient  to  exclude  from  ecclesiastical 
burial.  Those  who  have  been  publicly  excommunicated  by  the  greater 
excommunication ;  so  too  such  as  have  been  by  name  interdicted ; 
suicides,  unless  they  have  given  signs  of  penitence  before  death;  ma- 
nifest arid  public  sinners,  such  as  usurers,  and  those  who  have  notori- 
ously failed  to  receive  the  sacraments  of  confession  and  communion 
at  Easter,  and  who  have  departed  without  any  signs  of  penitence,  as 
well  as  persons  killed  in  a  duel,  and  infants  which  have  died  without 
baptism,  unless  still  in  the  womb  of  the  mother,  are  all  excluded  from 
consecrated  ground.  Whether  Catechumens  may  be  ecclesiastically 
interred,  is  a  controverted  question. 


496  CONCERNING  ORDERS. 

CHAPTER  XLII. 
Treatise  of  the  Sacrament  of  Orders. 

Decree  of  the  Council  of  Florence  for  the  instruction  of 
the  Armenians. 

"  The  sixth  sacrament  is  that  of  orders,  whose  matter  is  that  by  the 
delivery  of  which,  the  order  is  conferred ;  as  the  priesthood  is  con- 
ferred, by  the  delivery  of  the  cup  with  the  wine,  and  of  the  plate  with 
the  bread ;  the  deaconship  by  giving  the  book  of  the  gospels ;  the 
subdeaconship  by  the  delivery  of  the  empty  cup  with  an  empty  plate 
put  upon  it ;  and  likewise  of  the  rest  by  the  indication  of  the  things 
pertaining  to  their  peculiar  ministries.  The  form  of  the  priesthood  is : 
Receive  the  power  of  offering  sacrifice  in  the  church  for  the  living  and 
for  the  dead  in  the  name  of  the  Father  and  of  the  Son  and  of  the  Holy 
Ghost ;  and  so  of  the  forms  of  the  other  orders  as  it  is  contained  at 
length  in  the  Roman  Pontifical.  The  ordinary  minister  of  this  sacra- 
ment is  the  Bishop.  The  effect  is  an  increase  of  grace,  so  that  the 
person  may  be  a  proper  minister. 

Canons  of  the  Council  of  Trent  concerning  Orders. 

1.  "  Whoever  shall  say  that  in  the  New  Testament,  there  is  not  a 
visible  and  external  priesthood :  or  that  there  is  not  any  power  of  con- 
secrating and  offering  the  true  body  and  blood  of  the  Lord,  and  of 
remitting  and  retaining  sins :  but  only  the  office  and  naked  ministry 
of  preaching  the  gospel ;  or  that  they  who  do  not  preach  are  surely 
not  priests ;  let  him  be  accursed ! 

2.  "Whoever  shall  say  that  besides  the  peiesthood  there  are  not 
other  orders  in  the  Catholic  church,  both  greater  and  inferior,  by 
which  as  by  certain  steps,  the  priestliood  may  be  attained ;  let  him  be 
accursed ! 

3.  •'  Whoever  shall  say  that  orders,  or  sacred  ordination,  is  not  truly 
and  properly  a  sacrament  instituted  by  Christ  the  Lord  ;  or  that  it  is 
a  certain  human  invention,  devised  by  men  ignorant  of  ecclesiastical 
things,  or  that  it  is  only  a  certain  ceremony  of  choosing  the  ministers 
of  the  word  of  God  and  of  the  sacraments :  let  him  be  accursed ! 


CONCERNING  MARRIAGE.  497 

4.  "  Whoever  shall  say  that  by  sacred  ordination  the  Holy  Spirit  is 
not  given,  and  that  therefore  the  Bishops  say  in  vain,  Receive  the  Holy 
Ghost :  or  that  by  it  character  is  not  impressed  :  or  that  he  who  has 
once  been  a  priest  may  again  become  a  layman :  let  him  be  accursed ! 

5.  "  Whoever  shall  say  that  the  sacred  unction  v^rhich  the  church 
uses  in  holy  ordination  is  not  only  not  required  but  is  contemptible 
and  pernicious ;  likewise  also  the  other  ceremonies  of  orders ;  let  him 
be  accursed ! 

6.  "  Whoever  shall  say  that  in  the  Catholic  church  there  is  not  a 
hierarchy  instituted  by  divine  appoihtment,  which  consists  of  Bishops, 
priests,  and  ministers ;  let  him  be  accursed  ! 

7.  "  Whoever  shall  say  that  Bishops  are  not  superior  to  priests,  or 
that  they  have  not  the  power  of  confirming  and  ordaining;  or 
that  that  which  they  have  is  common  to  them  with  the  priests ;  or 
that  orders  conferred  by  them  without  the  consent  or  call  of  the  people 
or  the  secular  power  are  null  and  void  ;  or  that  they  who  have  been  nei- 
ther duly  ordained  nor  sent  by  ecclesiastical  and  canonical  power,  but 
come  from  some  other  source,  are  lawful  ministers  of  the  word  and 
sacraments ;  let  him  be  accursed  ! 

8.  "  Whoever  shall  say  that  the  Bishops  who  are  appointed  by  the 
authority  of  the  Roman  Pontiff,  are  not  lawful  and  true  Bishops,  but  a 
human  invention ;  let  him  be  accursed  !" 


CHAPTER  XLIII. 

Teeatise  concerning  Marriage. 

Decree  of  the  Council  of  Florence  for  the  instruction  of 
the  Armenians. 

"  The  seventh  is  the  sacrament  of  Marriage,  which  is  a  sign  of  the 
union  of  Christ  and  the  Church,  according  to  the  Apostle,  who  says, 
Eph.  V.  32,  This  is  a  great  sacrament;  but  I  speak  in  Christ  and  in 
the  church.  The  efficient  cause  of  marriage  jjaually  is  the  mutual 
consent  expressed  by  words,  &c.  A  threefold  advantage  of  marriage 
is  assigned.  The  first  is,  receiving  and  educating  children  for  the 
worship  of  God ;  the  second  is  faith,  which  the  one  of  the  married  per- 
sons should  preserve  for  the  other ;  the  third  is  the  indivisibility  of 
42 


498  CONCERNING  MARRIAGE. 

marriage,  because  it  signifies  the  indivisible  union  of  Christ  and  the 
Church ;  although  on  account  of  fornication  it  may  be  lawful  to  make 
a  separation  from  the  bed,  yet  it  is  not  proper  to  contract  another 
marriage :  as  the  bond  of  matrimony  legitimately  contracted  is 
perpetual." 

Canons  of  the  Council  of  Trent  concerning  Marriage. 

1.  "  Whoever  shall  say  that  marriage  is  not  truly  and  properly  one 
of  the  seven  sacraments  of  the  Evangelical  laws  instituted  by  Christ 
the  Lord,  but  that  it  is  invented  by  men  in  the  church  and  does  not 
confer  grace  ;  let  him  be  accursed  ! 

2.  "  Whoever  shall  say  that  it  is  lawful  for  Christians  to  have  seve- 
ral wives  at  once  and  that  this  is  forbidden  by  no  divine  law ;  let  him 
be  accursed  ! 

3.  "  Whoever  shall  say  that  only  those  degrees  of  relationship  and 
affinity,  which  are  expressed  in  Leviticus  can  hinder  marriage  from 
being  contracted,  and  annul  the  contract ;  and  that  the  church  cannot 
dispense  in  any  of  them,  or  appoint  that  more  may  hinder  and  annul ; 
let  him  be  accursed ! 

4.  "  Whoever  shall  say  that  the  Church  could  not  constitute  im- 
pediments annulling  marriage,  or  that  in  constituting  them,  she  has 
erred ;  let  him  be  accursed ! 

5.  "  Whoever  shall  say  that  the  bond  of  marriage  may  be  dissolved 
on  account  of  heresy,  or  mutual  dislike  or  voluntary  absence  from  the 
husband  or  wife,  let  him  be  accursed ! 

6.  "  Whoever  shall  say  that  a  marriage  solemnized,  but  not  con- 
summated is  not  annulled  by  the  solemn  profession  of  a  religious  order 
by  one  of  the  parties ;  let  him  be  accursed ! 

4.  "  Whoever  shall  say,  that  the  Church  errs,  when  she  has  taught 
and  teaches  that  according  to  the  evangelical  and  apostolical  doctrine, 
the  bond  of  marriage  cannot  be  dissolved  on  account  of  the  adultery  of 
one  or  the  other  of  the  parties,  and  that  neither  of  them,  not  even  the 
innocent  party  who  has  given  no  cause  for  the  -adultery,  may  contract 
another  marriage,  whilst  the  party  is  living,  and  that  he  commits 
adultery,  who  marries  another  after  putting  away  his  adulterous  wife, 
or  she,  who  marries  another  after  putting  away  her  adulterous  hus- 
band ;   let  him  be  accursed ! 

8.  "  Whoever  shall  say  that  the  Church  is  in  error,  when  for  many 
reasons  she  decrees  that  a  separation  may  be  made  between  married 
persons  as  to  the  bed,  or  as  to  intercourse  either  for  a  certain  or  an 
uncertain  time ;  let  him  be  accursed  I 

9.  "  Whoever  shall  say  that  the  clergy  constituted  in  sacred  order 


CONCERNING  MARRIAGE.  499 

or  regulars,  who  have  solemnly  professed  chastity  may  contract  maf- 
riage,  and  that  the  contract  is  valid,  notwithstanding  ecclesiastical 
law,  or  vow,  and  that  to  maintain  the  opposite  is  nothing  else  than  to 
condemn  marriage,  and  that  all  may  contract  marriage  who  do  not 
think  that  they  have  the  gift  of  chastity,  even  though  they  have  vowed 
it ;  let  him  be  accursed :  as  God  does  not  deny  this  to  those  who  seek 
it  aright,  nor  does  he  suffer  us  to  be  tempted  above  what  we  are  able 
to  bear. 

10.  "Whoever  shall  say  that  the  married  state  is  to  be  preferred  to 
a  state  of  virginity,  or  celibacy,  and  that  it  is  not  better  and  more  blessed 
to  remain  in  virginity  or  celibacy,  than  to  be  joined  in  marriage ;  let 
him  be  accursed  ! 

11.  "Whoever  shall  affirm  that  the  prohibition  of  the  solemnization 
of  marriage  at  certain  times  of  the  year  is  a  tyrannical  superstition, 
borrowed  from  the  superstitions  of  the  pagans,  or  shall  condemn  the 
benedictions  and  other  ceremonies,  which  the  Church  uses  at  those 
times  :  let  him  be  accursed  ! 

12.  "  Whoever  shall  affirm  that  matrimonial  causes  do  not  belong 
to  the  ecclesiastical  judges  ;  let  him  be  accursed  !" 


The  Treatise  on  marriage  is  a  developement  of  the  peculiar  views 
contained  in  the  decree  of  the  Council  of  Florence  and  the  canons  of 
the  Council  of  Trent, — and  a  translation  would  not  repay  me  for  the 
labour  of  writing,  nor  the  reader  for  the  trouble  of  perusing  such  chap- 
ters as  are  fit  for  the  public  eye.  Topics  are  discussed  in  this  con- 
nection,  to  which  decency  almost  forbids  me  even  to  allude.  I  should 
disgust  every  modest  person  and  for  ever  forfeit  his  good  opinion,  if  I 
were  to  spread  before  an  English  reader  the  abominable  obscenity  in 
which  Peter  Dens  wallows  with  perfect  self-complacency.  I  will, 
however,  give  a  few  extracts  in  Latin,  and  if  the  priests  think  proper 
they  may  supply  an  English  translation  for  the  benefit  of  the  curious. 
The  following  questions  among  the  rest  are  gravely  and  systematically 
discussed. 

An  copula  carnalis  inter  conjuges  licite  habetur  propter  solam  volup- 
tatem  ?  Quantum  est  peccatum  exercere  actum  conjugalem  ob  solam 
voluptatem  ?  An  licet  actum  conjugalem  exercere  partim  ob  debitum 
finem,  putd.  generationem  prolis,  et  partim  ob  dclectationem  ?  An 
licitum  est  petere  debitum  conjugall  ex  solo  fine  vitandi  propriara 
incontincntiam,  non  concurrente  fine  generationis  prolis,  vel  redditionis 
debiti  ?**»****« 


500  CONCERNING  MARRIAGE. 

Colligitur  ex  dictis,  petitionem  debiti  esse  venialiter  malam,  si  uxor 
sit  senex,  aut  sterilis,  idque  sive  vir,  sive  uxor  petal ;  quia  non  potest 
intendi  prolis  generatio :  licite  tamen  reddi  potest,  quia  redditio  excusa- 
tur  ob  bonum  fidei.  *»*#»« 

Certum  est  conjuges  inter  se  peccare  posse,  etiam  graviter,  contra  virtu- 
tem  castitatis,  sive  continentiae  ratione  quaruradam  circumstantiarum. 
In  particular!  autem  definire  quaB  sint  mortales  quae  solum  veniales, 
perobscurum  est,  nee  eadem  omnium  sententia ;  ut  vel  ideo  sollicite 
persuadendum  sit  conjugatis,  ut  recordentur  se  esse  filios  sanctorum, 
quos  decet  in  sanctitate  conjugali  filios  procreare.  Quidam  auctores 
circumstantias  circa  actum  conjugalem  praecipue  observandas,  expri- 
munt  his  versibus. 

Sit  modus  et  finis,  sine  damno,  solve,  cohsBre, 
Sit  locus  et  tempus,  tactus,  nee  spernito  votum. 

1.  Ergo  debet  servari  modus,  sive  *i/MS,  qui  dupliciter  invertitur  :  1, 
Si  non  servetur  debitum  vas,  sed  copula  habeatur  in  vase  praepostero, 
vel  quocumque  alio  non  naturali :  quod  semper  mortale  est,  spectans 
ad  sodomiam  minorem  seu  imperfectam  :  idque  tenendum  contra  quos- 
dam  laxistas,  sive  copula  ibi  consummetur,  sive  tantum  inchoetur, 
consummanda  in  vase  naturali. 

2,  Modus  sive  situs,  invertitur,  sic  tamen,  ut  servetur  debitum  vas 
ad  copulam  a  natura  ordinatum,  si  v.  g.  fiat  accedendo  praepostere  a 
latere,  stando,  sedendo,  vel  si  vir  sit  succubus.  Modus  is  mortalis  est 
si  inde  suboriatur  periculura  poUutionis  respectu  alterutrius :  sive 
quando  periculum  est,  ne  semen  perdatur,  prout  saepe  accidit,  dum 
actus  exercetur  stando,  sedendo,  aut  viro  succumbente :  si  absit,  et 
sufficienter  proecaveatur  istud  periculum  ex  communi  sententia  id  non 
est  mortale.  Est  autem  veniale  ex  gravioribus,  ciim  sit  inversio 
ordinis  naturae.  Estque  generatim  modus  ille,  sine  causa  taliter 
eoeundi,  graviter  a  confessariis  reprehendendus.  Si  tamen  ob  justam 
rationem  situm  naturalem  conjuges  immutent,  secludaturque  dictum 
periculum  nullum  erit  peccatum,  &c."  The  following  question  is  also 
asked  :  "  An  uxor  potest  se  tactibus  excitare  ad  seminationem,  si  a 
copula  conjugali  se  retraxerit  maritus,  postquam  ipse  seminavit,  sed 
antequam  seminaverit  uxor  ?" 

"  Confessarius  potest  etiam  conjugatos  interrogare  sub  his  terminis:- 
Confidis,  quod  utaris  matrimonio  honesto  modo,  non  plus  facicndo  quam 
necessarium  est  ad  generandam  prolcm  ?  Non  habes  specialia  dubia 
quae  te  angunt?     Si  autem  poenitens  det  occasionem  ulterius  interro- 


CONCERNING  ANTICHRIST.  501 

gandi,  inquirat  confessarius,  an  sibi  vel  comparti  causaverit  periculum 
pollutionis,  vel  perditionis  seminis." 

The  atrocity  of  these  extracts  will  appear  infinitely  more  flagrant 
when  it  is  remembered  that  the  confessor  institutes  inquiries  in  relation 
to  all  these  things  in  order  that  he  may  ascertain  the  amount  of  guilt 
which  his  penitent  has  contracted !  Language  cannot  portray  the 
deep  indignation  and  abhorrence  with  which  every  enlightened  and 
virtuous  mind  must  regard  the  ineffable  arrogance  and  impudence  of 
the  Romish  priesthood.  Would  to  God  that  the  Roman  Catholic  laity 
for  whom  as  individuals  we  would  cherish  no  other  feelings  than  those 
of  the  utmost  kindness,  could  but  view  these  things  in  the  light  in 
which  we  see  them ! 


CHAPTER  XLIV. 

In  the  Treatise  which  treats  of  the  four  last  things,  viz.  death, 
judgment,  hell  and  heavenly  glory,  we  find  in  No.  15,  the  following 
remarks : 

Concerning  Antichrist. 

"  Who  is  here  meant  by  Antichrist  ?  Ans.  Some  particular  very 
wicked  man,  who  will  arise  in  the  last  days,  saying  that  he  is  Messiah, 
and  showing  himself  as  God,  2.  Thess.  ii.  4.  As  to  his  rise  and 
country  nothing  certain  is  held,  except  that  Damascenus  hands  down 
the  tradition  that  he  will  be  born  from  fornication,  and  the  ancients 
supposed  that  he  will  arise  from  the  tribe  of  Dan,  because  Rev.  vii.  the 
tribe  of  Dan  is  not  numbered  with  those  who  are  to  be  «aved. 

"  He  will  excite  terrible  persecution  against  the  Church,  and  will 
perform  many  lying  wonders  and  signs,  as  is  said,  2  Thess.  ii.  9. 
in  order  to  confirm  the  false  doctrine.  His  persecution  will  last  as  is 
thought  for  three  and  a  half  years  according  to  Dan.  vii.  25  :  '  And 
they  shall  be  delivered  into  his  hand  until  a  time,  and  times,  and  half 
a  time.'  At  length  the  Lord  Jesus  will  kill  him  with  the  spirit  of  his 
mouth,  2  Thess.  ii.  8. 

"  From  these  remarks  it  is  plain  how  foolish  is  the  calumny  of  here- 
tics of  our  time,  who  are  not  afraid  to  say  that  the  Roman  Pontiff  is 
Antichrist.     For : 

1.  "Antichrist  will  come  at  the  end  of  the  world  ;  the  Roman  Pon- 
■42* 


502  CONCERNING  PURGATORY. 

tiff  rules  the  church  now  upwards  of  1800  years,  by  a  continuous  suc- 
cession. 2.  He  will  be  a  particular  person  :  there  is  a  great  series  of 
Popes.  3..  He  will  call  himself  Christ ;  the  Pope  calls  himself  Christ's 
vicar.  4.  He  will  exalt  himself  above  all  that  is  called  God :  The 
Pope  calls  himself  the  servant  of  the  servants  of  God.  5.  The  advent 
of  Antichrist  will  be  in  all  power,  and  signs,  and  lying  wonders : 
no  history  relates  this  of  the  Roman  Pontiffs.  Some  of  them  indeed 
have  shone  forth  by  true  miracles,  but  many  other  saints  by  greater : 
nor  among  the  Pontiffs  was  any  distinguished  by  greater  miracles 
than  St.  Peter  :  will  they  peradventure  say  that  Christ  himself  appoint- 
ed Antichrist  over  his  own  Church  ? 

"  It  is  plain  also,  that  they  are  in  error,  who  have  supposed  that 
Nero  or  Mahomet  was  Antichrist ;  because  he  will  come  only  at  the 
end  of  the  world. 

"06/.  L  John  ii.  18,  it  is  said:  'Ye  have  heard  that  Antichrist 
Cometh ;  therefore  he  will  not  come  at  the  end  of  the  world.' 

"  Arts.  Cometh  in  the  present  is  put  for  will  come  on  account  of 
the  certainty  of  the  event. 

"  You  will  reply :  Immediately  after  the  words  cited  it  is  maintained, 
Even  now  there  are  many  Antichrists ;  therefore,  &c. 

"  Ans.  By  many  Antichrists,  John  means  heretics,  on  account  of 
their  resemblance  to  Antichrist ;  for,  Antichrist  signifies  one  who  is 
contrary  to  Christ." 

N.  B.  Our  reasons  for  conferring  the  title  of  Antichrist  upon  his 
Holiness  will  be  seen  at  the  close  of  this  chapter. 

Of  Purgatory.     (No.  25.) 

"  What  is  purgatory  ?  Ans.  It  is  the  place  in  which  the  souls  of 
departed  just  people,  which  were  obnoxious  to  temporal  punishments, 
endure  sufficient  suffering.  It  is  said,  endure  sufficient  suffering, 
because  as  souls  there  are  beyond  the  state  of  probation  they  can 
merit  no  longer,  nor  properly  satisfy  for  the  punishment  that  is 
due,  but  they  satisfy  only  in  punishment,  or  expiate  the  appoint- 
ed penalty :  so  that  they  cannot  help  and  liberate  themselves 
from  punishment,  except  by  enduring  sufficient  suffering.  What 
ought  we  to  believe  concerning  purgatory  ?  The  council  of  Trent, 
sess.  25,  in  the  commencement  of  the  decree  concerning  purgatory, 
has  settled  two  things  which  are  to  be  believed,  namely  that  there  is  a 
purgatory,  and  that  the  souls  there  detained  are  assisted  by  the  suf- 
frages of  the  faithful,  chiefly,  however,  by  the  acceptable  sacrifice  of 


CONCERNING  PURGATORY.        503 

the  altar.  This  faith  the  Greeks  also  professed  in  the  council  of 
Florence.  In  relation  to  the  remaining  questions  concerning  purga- 
tory, nothing  has  been  settled." 

The  proof  texts  of  the  existence  of  purgatory  are,  2  Mace.  xii.  ♦'  It 
is  therefore  a  holy  and  wholesome  thought  to  pray  for  the  dead  that 
they  may  be  loosed  from  sins."  Eccli.  vii.  37,  "  Restrain  not  grace 
from  the  dead."  Tobias,  iv.  18,  "  Lay  out  thy  bread  upon  the  burial 
of  a  just  man."  Matt.  xii.  32,  where  Christ  says  of  the  sin  against 
the  Holy  Ghost :  "  It  shall  not  be  forgiven  him  either  in  this  world  or 
in  the  world  to  come."     1  Cor.  iii.  12,  "  Now  if  any  man  build  upon 

this  foundation,  gold,  silver,  precious  stones,  wood,  hay,  stubble ; 

and  the  fire  shall  try  every  man's  work  of  what  sort  it  is  ; if  any 

man's  work  burn,  he  shall  suffer  loss,  but  he  himself  shall  be  saved, 
yet  so  as  by  fire,  i.  e.  by  the  punishment  of  fire.  By  wood,  hay  and 
stubble,  venial  sins  are  denoted  :  although  indeed  the  text  may  seem  to 
treat  directly  of  the  fire  of  conflagration,  nevertheless  purgatory  is 
rightly  evinced  from  it  by  parity  of  reason  :  for  if  then  the  souls  of 
the  just  must  be  purged  from  the  guilt  of  the  punishment  of  venial 
sins  by  that  fire,  the  souls  of  the  just  obnoxious  to  a  similar  guilt  ought 
likewise  to  be  purged  by  fire." 

"  St.  Augustine  wrote  a  whole  book  concerning  care  for  the  dead, 
in  which  he  teaches,  both  that  there  is  a  purgatory,  and  that  the  souls 
there  detained,  are  helped  by  the  suffrages  of  the  faithful :  nor  did  he 
only  teach  it,  he  practised  it  also,  in  respect  to  his  deceased  mother, 
,  S.  Monica,  as  he  himself  relates,  Bk.  9.  conf.  cap.  13.  The  aforesaid 
doctrine  may  be  proved  also  by  the  following  reasons. 

"  First ;  when  a  fault  has  been  remitted,  there  frequently  remain 
temporal  punishments  to  be  expiated ;  and  if  these  are  not  paid,  in 
such  a  case  justice  demands,  that  a  person  expiate  them  after  this  life ; 
lest  otherwise  they  should  be  equal,  who  die  with  a  great  debt  of  pun- 
ishments, and  those  who  die  with  none. 

"  Second  ;  it  may  happen  that  a  man  dies  in  venial  sin  :  but  in  such 
a  case  this  sin  will  indeed  be  remitted,  as  to  the  fault,  by  the  act  of 
charity  which  the  soul  elicits  at  the  first  instant  of  its  separation  from 
the  body,  as  S.  Thom.  teaches.  But  by  this  act  of  charity,  the  liability 
to  punishment  will  be  neither  removed  nor  diminished ;  and  therefore 
satisfaction  ought  to  be  made  for  it  in  purgatory.  St.  Thomas  in  the 
passage  quoted,  gives  as  a  reason,  that  as  after  this  life  there  is  no  state 
of  meriting,  this  act  of  delight  in  them,  takes  away  indeed  the  impedi- 
ment of  venial  sin,  yet  it  does  not  merit  either  absolution  or  a  diminu- 
tion of  punishment,  as  in  this  life." 

"  Where  is  purgatory  ?    The  ordinary  place  of  purgatory,  which  is 


504        CONCERNING  PURGATORY. 

properly  and  commonly  understood  by  the  name  of  purgatory,  is  under 
the  earth,  near  to  hell."  The  punishment  of  purgatory  is  twofold : 
one  of  loss^  the  other  of  sense,  but  both  temporal.  The  punishment 
of  loss,  is  merely  a  delay  of  the  beatific  vision,  as  a  punishment  of 
sins.  "  Is  the  punishment  of  sense  in  purgatory  caused  by  material 
five  ?  The  opinion  of  the  Latins  is  steadfast,  and  is  to  be  retained, 
that  in  purgatory  there  is  material  fire,  similar  to  the  fire  of  hell ; 
hence  the  Church  asks  for  the  souls  .of  the  faithful,  not  only  a  place 
of  light  and  peace,  but  also  of  coolness  against  the  heat  of  the  fire. 
However,  this  opinion  is  not  of  the  faith,  as  the  Greeks  in  the  council 
of  Florence  maintained,  that  in  purgatory  there  is  not  real  fire,  but 
that  it  is  only  a  place  full  of  hardships  and  sorrows,  and  that  by  these, 
the  punishment  of  sense  is  occasioned,  and  yet  they  were  not  con- 
demned either  in  the  council  of  Florence  or  of  Trent. 

"  How  great  is  the  punishment  of  purgatory  ?  St.  Thomas  teaches, 
that  both  punishments  of  purgatory,  as  well  of  loss  as  of  sense,  exceed 
all  the  punishments  of  this  life.  S.  Bonaventure  and  Bcllarmine,  teach 
that  the  greatest  punishment  of  purgatory,  is  indeed  more  severe  than 
the  greatest  punishment  of  this  world ;  not  however,  that  the  least 
punishment  of  purgatory  is  greater  than  the  greatest  of  this  life.  At 
all  events,  although  this  thing  is  uncertain,  it  is  still  certain  that  the 
punishment  of  purgatory  is  very  grievous  and  bitter :  as  is  plain,  both 
from  the  solicitude  of  the  Church,  which  exhorts  us  to  works  of  satis- 
faction, and  to  earn  indulgences,  and  because  the  future  world  is  a 
world  of  retribution  and  punishment;  also  from  the  opinion  of  the 
holy  Fathers.  The  punishment  of  purgatory  is  more  mild  than  that 
of  hell.  It  is  also  greatly  alleviated  by  the  friendship  of  God,  and  the 
certainty  of  obtaining  glory,  as  also  by  the  resignation  of  the  sufferers 
to  the  most  righteous  will  of  God.  St.  Thomas  teaches  that  the  souls 
in  purgatory  are  not  harassed  by  devils,  because  they  have  triumphed 
over  them ;  nor  also  by  the  good  angels,  because  they  would  not  so 
grievously  afflict  their  own  citizens." 

All  are  not  equally  punished  in  purgatory  :  but  according  to  the 
debt,  the  punishment  both  of  loss  and  of  sense,  will  be  greater  or  less. 
Whether  the  punishment  gradually  becomes  less  severe,  is  uncertain ; 
Bellarmine  and  Sylvius  maintain  that  it  does.  The  length  of  time 
during  which  souls  are  detained  in  purgatory  is  not  known;  neither 
are  all  souls  punished  equally  long ;  the  duration  of  their  suffering  is 
graduated  in  proportion  to  their  guilt.  They  are  certain  of  their  sal- 
vation, and  are  confirmed  in  grace,  so  that  they  cannot  lose  it.  They 
Bufl'er  with  consuumiate  patience,  and  are  constantly  exercising  acta 


CONCERNING  PURGATORY.        505 

of  charity,  faith  and  hope,  but  they  merit  nothing  by  these  acts.  There 
can  be  no  doubt  that  the  souls  in  purgatory  pray  for  themselves;  whe- 
ther they  pray  for  us  is  doubtful;  but  Bellarmine,  Estius  and  Sylvius, 
affirm  that  they  do,  especially  for  those  who  pray  for  them ;  and 
although  these  souls  do  not  know  who  of  us  prays  for  them,  this  is  no 
objection,  because  they  may  pray  for  all  who  pray  for  them  in  general ; 
besides  they  have  the  knowledge  which  they  had  gained  before  their 
departure,  and  may  be  guided  in  some  measure  by  that.  Whether  the 
souls  in  purgatory  may  be  invoked,  is  not  altogether  clear,  Steyaert 
says  nay,  Bellarmine  says  yea. 

The  communion  of  saints  shows  very  evidently,  that  souls  in  pur- 
gatory  may  be  assisted  by  the  suffrages  of  the  living.  The  militant 
and  the  suffering  Church  sympathize  with  each  other.  Besides  the 
constant,  perpetual,  and  universal  practice  of  the  Church,  abundantly 
proves  that  the  suffering  Church  is  assisted  by  the  prayers,  &c.,  of  the 
faithful  upon  earth.  The  principal  means  of  assisting  the  souls  in 
purgatory,  are,  above  all — the  sacrifice  of  the  mass ;  then  indulgences 
applied  to  the  dead ;  and  finally,  prayers,  alms,  and  any  other  good 
works  performed  from  charity.  It  is  very  probable  that  the  suffrages 
infallibly  benefit  those  deceased  souls  for  whom  they  are  offered ;  but 
it  is  not  so  clear  whether  the  whole  benefit  is  thus  applied.  The 
objection  that  the  souls  of  the  rich  are  in  a  better  condition  in  purga- 
tory, than  those  of  the  poor,  is  obviated  amongst  the  rest,  by  the  sug- 
gestion, that  perhaps  the  deficiency  of  masses,  &c.,  for  the  poor,  "  is 
compensated  by  this,  that  God  applies  to  them  the  suffrages  made  for 
those,  who  are  either  damned,  or  already  in  heaven,"  to  neither  of 
which  classes,  suffrages  can  be  of  any  benefit.  Suffrages  are  not 
made  for  baptized  children,  who  have  died  before  the  use  of  reason. 
When  masses  are  said  for  them,  it  is  only  by  way  of  solemn  protesta- 
tion of  the  belief  of  their  resurrection,  and  as  an  expression  of  thanks 
for  the  benefit  conferred  on  them. 

The  belief  of  purgatory  is  enjoined  upon  the  members  of  the  Ro- 
mish Church  as  an  article  of  faith,  according  to  the  bull  of  Pope 
Pius  IV.  in  which  the  following  confession  is  made :  "  I  do  constantly 
hold  that  there  is  a  purgatory,  and  that  the  souls  there  detained  are 
helped  by  the  suffrages  of  the  faithful."  The  word  purgatory  is  deri- 
ved from  the  Latin  verb  purgo,  I  cleanse,  purge,  refine,  &c.  Now  in 
this  strict  and  literal  sense  the  blood  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  is  the 
true  purgatory — for  he  is  said,  Heb.  i.  3  ;  "  by  himself  to  have  purged 
away  our  sins."  And  again,  1  John  i.  7  ;  "  The  blood  of  Jesus  Christ 
cleanseth  us  from  all  sin."     But  in  an  inferior  sense,  afflictions,  and 


r)06  CONCERNING  PURGATORY. 

faith,  and  the  influences  of  the  Holy  Spirit  and  the  preaching  of  the 
word,  are  said  to  purge  and  purify. 

Amid  all  the  uncertainty  with  which  this  subject  is  invested,  we  are 
told  that  there  are  two  things,  which  the  faithful  must  believe,  the  one 
is  that  there  is  a  purgatory,  and  the  other  that  the  souls  of  the  faithful 
there  detained  are  aided  by  the  suffrages  of  their  brethren  on  earth. 
The  first  proof  which  Peter  Dens  offers  is  the  passage  from  Judas 
Macchabaeus.  "  It  is  therefore  a  holy  and  a  salutary  thought  to 
pray  for  the  dead  that  they  may  be  loosed  from  sins."  To  this  we 
answer : 

1.  The  book  is  apocryphal,  and  therefore  of  no  authority  in  any 
matter  of  faith. 

2.  This  act  of  Judas,  even  supposing  it  were  precisely  what  Papists 
affirm,  cannot  justify  prayers  for  the  dead,  any  more  than  the  suicide 
of  Rasias,  xiv.  41,  which  Judas  applauds,  (v.  42,)  proves  that  it  is 
"  a  holy  and  salutary  thought,"  for  a  man  to  kill  himself,  when  he  is 
in  danger  of  being  taken  prisoner. 

3.  In  the  original  Greek  Text  the  words  are  -rrpotrdyeiv  ir^pi  ufiapnas 
■&vcr/av,  which  are  rendered  in  the  vulgate  pro  peccatis  mortuorum  sac- 
rificium  &c.,  which  is  a  most  unwarrantable  liberty,  for  literally  the 
original  means  to  offer  a  sacrifice  for  sin;  which  may  very  properly 
be  understood  as  implying  that  Judas  made  a  propitiation  for  the  dead, 
lest  for  their  sin  God  should  punish  the  rest  of  the  army,  and  if  so,  the 
words  "  that  they  may  be  loosed  from  sins,"  would  refer  not  to  the 
dead,  but  to  the  living.  Now  Judas  did  this  either  against  the  Law  or 
in  accordance  with  it ;  if  pgainst  it,  he  is  not  to  be  imitated ;  if  accord- 
ing to  the  Law,  we  ask  the  erudite  priests  to  show  us  the  authority  in 
the  Levitical  law,  for  their  sacrifices  for  the  dead. 

The  next  passage  we  notice  is  from  Tobit,  iv.  18,  where  Tobias 
requires  bread  and  wine  to  be  placed  on  a  righteous  man's  sepulchre  ; 
i.  e.  we  suppose,  he  called  together  the  poor,  and  gave  them  alms  that 
they  might  pray  for  the  soul  of  the  deceased. 

The  advocates  of  purgatory  must  be  sorely  pressed  for  evidence  if 
they  look  for  it  in  this  passage  of  the  Book  of  Tobit ;  for  they  ought 
to  know  that  it  was  customary  among  the  Jews  to  comfort  the  poor 
mourning  relatives  of  the  deceased  by  giving  them  a  kind  of  funeral 
banquet ;  hence  the  force  of  the  language,  Jer.  xvi.  5,  7  ;  "  Thus  saith 
the  Lord,  Enter  not  into  the  house  of  mourning,  neither  go  to  lament 
nor  bemoan  them  :  for  I  have  taken  away  my  peace  from  this  people, 
neither  shall  men  give  them  the  cup  of  consolation  to  drink  for  their 
father  or  their  mother." 


CONCERNING  ANTICHRIST.  507 

"  Another  argument  for  purgatory  is  based  upon  the  language  of 
Christ,  Matt.  xii.  32;  "Whoever  speaketh  against  the  Holy  Ghost,  it 
shall  not  be  forgiven  him,  neither  in  this  world,  nor  in  the  world  to 
come."     In  reply,  we  remark  : 

1.  The  words  "seculum  futurum,"  or  the  world  to  come,  are  never 
used  to  denote  the  time  between  death  and  the  last  day,  but  invariably 
designate  either  the  gospel  dispensation,  or  the  last  day,  or  the  condi- 
tion subsequent  to  the  judgment,  Luke  xx.  35,  &,c. 

2.  It  is  not  logical  to  infer  an  absolute  affirmative  from  two  nega- 
tives ;  V.  g.  *'  this  sin  shall  be  forgiven  neither  in  this  world,  nor  in 
the  world  to  come,"  therefore,  some  sins  shall  be  forgiven  in  the  world 
to  come.  This  is  a  specimen  of  the  close  reasoning  of  Romish 
theologians. 

3.  The  meaning  of  these  words  is  evident  from  the  parallel  passages 
in  Mark  iii.  29,  and  Luke  xii.  10,  where  it  is  said  that  this  sin  "  shall 
never  be  forgiven ; "  and  again  "  shall  not  be  forgiven."  And  at  all 
events  the  passage  will  not  sustain  the  Romish  doctrine,  because  in 
purgatory  sins  are  not  forgiven  but  expiated  by  suffering. 

"  What,"  says  Archbishop  Tillotson,  "  have  we  here  to  do  with 
remission  of  sins?  Purgatory  is  a  place  not  where  sins  are  remitted 
but  where  they  are  punished  with  the  greatest  severity.  Nay,  what 
is  still  more,  punished  after  they  are  remitted,  nay,  what  is  still  more 
extraordinary,  therefore  punished,  because  they  are  remitted ;  for  if 
the  guilt  were  not  remitted,  the  sinner  could  not  go  to  purgatory,  nor 
have  the  favour  of  being  punished  there." 

In  concluding  this  work,  I  cannot  offer  anything  more  appropriate 
than  the  evidences,  which  conspire  to  prove  that  the  Head  of  the 
Romish  Church  is  really  par  excellence  the  Antichrist  spoken  of  in  the 
word  of  God.  The  Greek  preposition  avn  admit§  of  a  two-fold  inter- 
pretation; it  sometimes  signifies  for,  or  in  the  place  of,  implying  a 
vicegerency  or  subordination;  thus  in  profane  authors  we  read  of 
avTi  (ia<Ti\evs  and  avucrTpaTrjyos,  which  designate  the  officer  next  to  the 
King  or  Captain.  This  signification  Peter  Dens  carefully  omits,  lest 
^nfichrist  might  be  found  after  all  to  mean  Christ's  vicar.  The  word 
is,  however,  more  frequently  employed  as  signifying  against,  and  as 
denoting  opposition.  In  either  of  these  senses,  and  in  both  conjointly, 
the  Pope  is  emphatically  Antichrist.  We  admit  that  the  name  may 
be  used  in  its  common  acceptation  to  denote  all  the  adversaries  of 
Christ,  and  thus  as  the  Apostle  John  says,  there  may  be  "  many  Anti- 
christs," but  it  is  evidently  employed  with  special  reference  to  some 
particular  apostasy  eminent  for  wickedness  and  for  the  bitterness  of 


508  CONCERNING  ANTICHRIST. 

its  opposition  to  Christ.  The  fanciful  theories  of  Romish  autliors  on 
tliis  subject  show  the  difficulty  which  it  presents  to  them.  One  main- 
tains that  Antichrist  will  be  born  of  a  Virgin  by  the  agency  of  the 
Devil;  another  that  he  will  be  a  devil  incarnate,  assuming  false  flesh 
from  a  false  virgin ;  another  that  he  shall  be  a  devil-man,  partaking  of 
the  nature  of  Satan  and  man ;  another  that  Nero  shall  rise  again  and 
become  Antichrist.  Some  have  said  tlie  Turk  is  Antichrist,  and 
others  have  imagined  that  he  shall  be  a  Jew,  the  son  of  Satan,  and  of  a 
woman  of  the  tribe  of  Dan.  But  these  are  certainly  not  the  character- 
istics, which  the  word  of  God  designates  as  the  peculiarities  of  Anti- 
christ, our  enemies  themselves  being  witness.  Now,  when  we  affirm 
that  the  Pope  is  Antichrist,  we  do  not  mean  all  the  Bishops  of  Rome 
from  the  times  of  the  Apostles,  but  only  since  the  defection  of  the 
Church.  This  apostasy  commenced  in  the  fourth  century,  which  was 
a  period  of  gross  corruption  of  the  Church.  Jerome,  A.  D.  390,  com- 
plains of  the  avarice  and  corruption  of  the  clergy,  and  of  the  prohibi- 
tion of  MARRIAGES  and  MEATS :  and  Augustine  laments,  A.  D.  399,  that 
the  Church  was  fallen  from  her  purity.  But  these  were  only  the  pre- 
parations for  the  rise  of  the  Man  of  Sin.  The  Pontiff*  had  not  yet 
gained  supreme  power ;  the  civil  authority  of  the  Roman  state  still 
hindered,  and  therefore  wasjirst  to  be  taken  out  of  the  way,  2.  Thess. 
ii.  6,  7.  When  Jerome  heard  of  the  capture  of  Rome  by  Alaric,  the 
King  of  the  Goths,  he  expected  the  coming  of  Antichrist.  In  his 
epistle  to  Ageruchia  he  says  :  He  that  letteth  is  removed,  and  shall  we 
not  know  that  Antichrist  is  near  at  hand?  Some  designate  the 
year  606,  as  the  period  of  the  first  revelation  of  Antichrist,  when  Pope 
Boniface  III.  by  the  help  of  the  rebel  and  murderer  Phocas,  assumed 
the  title  of  Universal  Bishop.  Others  refer  it  to  the  times  of  Pepin 
and  Charlemagne  about  the  year  750.  We  call  the  Pope,  Antichrist, 
by  way  of  distinction,  as  he  is  the  head  of  the  Antichristian  apostasy ; 
and  it  will  not  be  denied  that  it  is  a  common  thing  in  Scripture  to 
designate  a  body  politic,  state,  or  succession  of  men  J?y  a  particular 
person  or  individual.  Thus  Deut.  xvii.  14,  20 ;  the  king  of  Israel  is 
used  to  denote  all  the  kings  of  Israel.  Num.  xxxv.  25,  28 ;  by  the 
High  Priest  is  to  be  understood  any  High  Priest  in  a  regular 
course  of  succession.  In  Daniel  vii.  1,  3 ;  each  beast  signifies 
a  multitude  of  men  in  a  succession  under  one  government,  which 
lasted  for  ages.  Rev.  xii.  1 ;  the  state  of  the  Church  is  indicated 
by  the  figure  of  a  woman  in  travail,  and  afterwards  by  a  woman 
in  the  wilderness,  &c.,  and  thus  the  Popes  in  succession  are 
designated  in  the  word  of  God  as  the  head  of  the  Antichristian 
apostasy,  although  there  have  been  a  great  series  of  Popes  ;  and  thus 


CONCERNING  ANTICHRIST.  509 

we  dispose  of  Peter  Dens'  second  objection.  The  rest  shall  be  attend- 
ed to  in  due  season,  though  for  convenience  sake  we  may  notice  them 
m  an  order  different  from  that  in  which  they  are  stated.  We  pro- 
ceed to  show  that  the  great  characteristics  of  Antichrist  as  delineated 
by  the  Holy  Spirit  in  the  word  of  God,  are  all  found  in  the  Romish 
apostasy. 

1.  Is  Antichrist  denominated  "  the  man  op  sin,  the  son  of  perdi- 
tion," 2  Thess.  ii.  3  ?  Witness  the  horrible  lives  of  most  of  the 
Popes,  and  the  encouragement  they  give  to  sin  by  their  indulgences, 
jubilees,  &c. 

2.  Does  he  sit  in  the  temple  of  God  as  God,  and  exalt  himself  above 
all  that  is  called  God  7  Witness  the  language  of  the  Romish  theolo- 
gians; the  priest  does  not  know  the  confession  of  a  penitent  as  man, 
though  he  may  know  it  as  God  !  Hear  the  blasphemous  adulation  of 
the  Pontiff's  vassals,  who  accost  him  as  Our  Lord  God  the  Pope  ! 
Look  at  the  title,  which  the  Head  of  the  Romish  Church  claims  as  his 
prerogative.  His  Holiness,  the  Pope !  But,  says  Dens,  "  the  Pope 
calls  himself  the  servant  of  the  sej*vants  of  God,"  hence  he  cannot  be 
the  Antichrist  of  whom  Paul  speaks !  He  calls  himself  the  servant  of 
the  servants  of  God,  and  permits  others  to  accost  him  as  their  Lord 
God  !  He  calls  himself  the  servant  &c.,  and  yet  claims  to  be  above 
all  law ;  exalts  himself  above  all  civil  authority ;  puts  his  foot  upon 
the  neck  of  kings,  and  makes  Emperors  kiss  his  holy  slipper ;  pro- 
fesses to  hold  the  keys  of  heaven  and  hell,  to  have  power  to  absolve 
subjects  from  their  oath  of  allegiance  to  their  lawful  rulers ;  acts  as 
the  King  of  Kings  and  Lord  of  Lords,  and  then  with  the  utmost  com- 
placency plumes  himself  upon  his  vast  humility  in  assuming  a  title, 
which  is  belied  by  every  official  act  which  he  performs !  In  fact  by 
styling  himself  the  servant  of  the  servants  of  God,  he  verifies  another 
characteristic  of  Antichrist,  who  is  to  be  known  by  "  speaking  lies  in 
hypocrisy  r* 

3.  The  antichristian  apostasy  is  to  be  characterized  by  "  giving  h6ed 
to  doctrines  of  devils."  The  word  rendered  devils,  here  might  have 
been  translated  demori-gods ;  it  is  the  same  word  that  is  used  in  re- 
peated  instances  in  profane  authors,  to  designate  the  spirits  of  departed 
men,  who  were  declared  gods  by  an  apotheosis  not  unlike  the  Pope's 
canonization  of  saints ;  and  there  can  be  no  doubt,  that  the  invocation 
of  the  Romish  saints,  is  the  very  abuse  which  is  thus  designated  by 
the  Holy  Spirit. 

4.  Antichrist  shall  forbid  to  marry.     Who  does  not  see  the  veri 
fication  of  this  prediction  in  the  celibacy  of  the  Romish  priesthood  7 

43 


510  CONGERNING  ANTICHRIST. 

If  this  be  denied,  show  us  the  sect  professing  to  be  Christian,  (for 
remem-ber,  it  must  be  a  departure  from  the  faith,  1  Tim.  iv.  1,  not  a 
heresy,  which  originated  like  the  Moslem  delusion,  entirely  apart  from 
the  Church;)  which  at  all  forbids  marriage,  except  the  Church  of 
Rome ! 

5.  Antichrist  shall  command  to  abstain  from  meats  ;  not  to  fast ; 
but  to  abstain  from  meats ;  see  this  verified  to  the  very  letter  in  the 
discipline  of  the  Romish  apostasy,  which  permits  men  to  eat  any 
thing  but  MEATS  on  a  fast  day ;  according  to  Peter  Dens  on  a  day  of 
solemn  ecclesiastical  fast,  the  faithful  may  be  two  hours  at  the  table, 
before  the  guests  are  to  be  admonished  to  abstain  from  eating ;  but 
they  may  not  eat  meat  under  pain  of  mortal  sin. 

6.  The  coming  of  that  wicked  one  "  is  after  the  working  of  Satan." 
The  chief  attributes  of  Satan's  character  are  falsehood  and  cruelty. 
And  has  not  the  apostasy,  whose  head  is  the  Pope,  introduced  false 
doctrine,  false  worship,  and  a  false  religion  into  the  Church,  and  thus 
become  the  great  murderer  of  souls  ?  Satan  shows  that  he  is  a  liar, 
when  he  deludes  souls  into  a  false  worship,  and  changes  the  truth  of 
God  into  a  lie ;  (Rom.  i.  5.) ;  and  he  has  never  done  this  more  effectu- 
ally, than  in  the  establishment  of  the  idolatrous  worship  of  Rome. 
The  Church  of  Rome  for  centuries,  has  worn  out  the  saints  of  the 
Most  High.  The  blood  of  sixty  millions  of  «ouls,  cries  from  earth  to 
heaven,  against  her.  Her  coming  is  truly  after  the  working  of  Satan, 
with  all  power,  secular  and  spiritual ! 

7.  Antichrist  is  to  come  with  "  signs  and  lying  wonders."  Strange 
that  our  theologian  should  assert  that  this  cannot  be  substantiated  of 
the  Popes,  some  of  whom  he  asserts,  have  been  distinguished  by  the 
power  of  working  real  miracles,  though  many  of  the  saints  have 
wrought  greater.  It  is  the  boast  of  the  Romish  Church,  that  she  still 
retains  the  power  of  working  miracles.  Even  in  our  own  city,  and 
in  the  present  year,  legends  have  been  published,  corftaining  reputed 
miracles  of  St.  Francis  Xavier,  St.  Ignatius,  &c.,  which  in  absurdity 
are  not  to  be  surpassed  by  -any  work  of  fiction  or  romance,  that  has  ever 
appeared  in  print;  the  adventures  of  Gulliver  and  Baron  Munchausen, 
are  far  more  probable  than  the  insane  stories  that  are  told  about  these 
saints.  Here  is  a  specimen  of  the  "  lying  wonders,"  which  are  actu- 
ally detailed  and  retailed  in  this  enlightened  community.  On  one 
occasion,  St.  Francis  Xavier  whilst  at  sea,  leaning  over  the  side  of  the 
ship,  lets  a  precious  crucifix  fall  overboard.  The  saint,  as  n/ay  well 
be  supposed,  is  overwhelmed  with  grief  at  the  loss,  and  for  a  season  is 
almost  disconsolate.  In  due  time  the  saint  is  set  ashore,  and  whilst 
walking  along  the  beach  in  company  with  some  friends,  they  observe 


CONCERNING  ANTICHRIST.  511 

at  a  distance  a  crab  moving  towards  them ;  and  as  it  approaches 
nearer,  something  is  discerned  in  its  claws ;  it  proves  to  be  the  saint's 
crucifix;  the  crab  lays  the  crucifix  at  the  saint's  feet  with  the  utmost 
reverence,  and  then  demurely  walks  back  into  the  sea.  A  large  vol- 
ume of  upwards  of  400  pages,  is  filled  with  such  stuff  as  this.  Shall 
we  be  asked  here,  where  is  the  evidence  that  the  Romish  Church 
deals  in  "  lying  wonders  ?" 

But  the  objection  is  ofiered,  that  antichrist  shall  reign  but  three 
years  and  a  half;  whereas  the  Popes  have  filled  the  chair  of  St.  Peter 
for  upwards  of  eighteen  hundred  years.  This,  by  the  way,  is  not  true. 
For  it  was  in  the  year  606,  that  the  bishop  of  Rome  first  claimed  and 
usurped  universal  supremacy.  So  that  if  Peter  ever  was  bishop  of 
Rome,  we  cannot  be  said  to  include  the  apostle  in  the  Romish  apos- 
tasy. The  text  in  Daniel  ch.  vii.,  to  which  allusion  is  made,  is  some- 
times referred  to  the  tyrant  Antiochus,  who  is  considered  as  a  type  of 
Antichrist;  besides,  the  years  are  prophetical;  hence  each  one  of  them 
omtains  365  years,  so  that  this  is  equivalent  to  the  period  of  42  months, 
Rev.  xi.  2.,  or  a  thousand  two  hundred  and  threescore,  or  1260  days, 
mentioned  Rev.  xii.  6,  according  to  the  key  furnished  in  Ezek.  iv.  6. 
"I  appoint  thee  each  day  for  a  year."  This  period  of  1260  years, 
added  to  the  606,  when  the  title  of  Universal  Bishop  was  assumed, 
brings  us  to  the  year  1866,  when  we  anticipate  the  overthrow  of  his 
spiritual  supremacy.  For  a  masterly  and  succinct  view  of  this  sub- 
ject, I  refer  my  reader  to  Dr.  Brownlee's  Introduction  to  my  lectures 
on  Romanism.  The  objection  that  antichrist  will  call  himself  Christ, 
whereas  the  Pope  calls  himself  Christ's  vicar,  is  already  answered. 
One  meaning  of  antichrist,  is  literally  Christ's  vicar  ;  just  as  am 
^aaiXevs  means  viceroy. 

I  bless  God  that  I  have  been  spared  to  finish  this  synopsis ;  may 
the  Lord  whom  I  desire  to  serve,  use  it  to  counteract  in  some 
measure  at  least,  the  wiles  and  delusions  of  the  Man  of  sin,  and  to  his 
great  and  holy  name,  shall  be  all  the  glory  !  If  Protestant  ministers 
find  it  of  service  to  them  in  combating  the  errors  of  antichrist,  I  shall 
be  amply  repaid  for  the  labour  which  it  has  cost  me.  They  are 
required  to  testify  against  this  apostasy ;  for  Paul  after  specifying  the 
characteristic  marks  which  we  have  just  reviewed,  adds  these  words : 
"  If  thou  put  the  brethren  in  remembrance  of  these  things,  thou  shall 
be  a  good  minister  of  Jesus  Christ,  nourished  up  in  the  words  of  faith 
and  of  good  doctrine,  whereunto  thou  hast  attained."  May  the  Lord, 
by  his  grace,  help  us  to  do  this  in  a  spirit  of  love,  and  with  a  sincere 
desire  to  save  souls  from  death ! 

THE    END. 


i^mm^' 


I 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 

This  boox-  --  ^OE  on  the  last  date  stamped  below. 

FineJb£hfiduifiM^<^<^nts  on  iirst  day  o^'erdue    iMMpit'?''^^ 

PlCents  on  fourth  day  overdue   '^  '     '    '  ~^tH 


NOV    5   1947 

MAR  1 S  '.3CG 
■T3EC5    "BBjii.' 


One  dollar  on  seventh  day  overd 


rdue.  ^ 


r  •     '^  "^  1 
;^EC.CIR.AUG  2518 


LD  21-100m-12,'46(A2012sl6)4120 


5^74 /r 

y4 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


